Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Shashi Kanta on 1 February, 2023
Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4400/2016
THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. ..APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SHASHI KANTA ..RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Applications for impleadment are allowed. The issue before us, languishing for over seven years, is relating to the respondent who is interviewed for the post of Craft Teacher under Gram Panchayat Amtrar, Development Block Nagrota Bagwan, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh in January 2005. These are the facts of the case of the respondent but there have been similar recruitments from time to time which are stated to be through a transparent process and we are informed that while in the present case the State Government preferred an appeal arising from the impugned judgment dated 14.05.2015, there are Signature Not Verified many such cases pending in the High Court. Digitally signed by Charanjeet Kaur Date: 2023.02.04 12:36:40 IST Reason:
The grievance made is that of the respondent herein but we may note the similar 2 grievance of the applicants and others that they were working as part time Craft Teachers but have not been conferred daily wage status.
A perusal of the impugned order shows that the Division Bench while analyzing the matter on the aforesaid conspectus, noticed that these are employees of the Gram Panchayants and not of the State Government and the State Government had permitted them to be considered against the post of Panchayat Sahayaks and similar pattern for other employments i.e. for the post of Anganwadi workers. There are stated to be about 3243 Panchayats in the State of Himachal Pradesh and the honorarium paid for working upto four hours is Rs. 2,000/- per month. We may note that what appears to have given rise to the present appeal is a direction finally passed for the State Government and the Finance Commission for Panchayats constituted under Section 98 of the Act to formulate a Scheme at par with Scheme for the State Government to confer daily wage status upon the respondent and similarly situated persons after completion of eight years of service within a period of twelve weeks from the date of the order and to regularize them in their post.
The applicants before us have pointed out that there have been subsequent developments as 3 they have been given the status of daily wage workers getting Rs. 12,000/- per month but the grievance remains about regularization. The respondent has apparently lost interest in the matter as she has superannuated.
We find it difficult to uphold the nature of directions passed in para 7 of the order, more specifically, because the Court recognized in para 6 that it is for the State Government to frame policies/guidelines for conferment of daily wage status as also regularization. The first grievance really does not survive and the only grievance surviving is as to whether such workers who are now daily wage workers can be regularized in terms of any Scheme to be framed in that behalf.
We are of the view that only direction that can be issued is for the State Government and the concerned authorities to examine the matter to find out whether any such regularization Scheme can be framed. There are schemes at times framed where periodically some people are absorbed as permanent. The matter may be examined by the State Government within a period of three months from today and appropriate decision communicated to the respondent as well as applicants.
The directions contained in para 7 of the 4 impugned order are thus set aside.
The appeal accordingly stands disposed of in terms aforesaid.
....................J. [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL] ....................J. [ABHAY S. OKA] NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 01, 2023.
5
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.2 SECTION XIV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 4400/2016 THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS SHASHI KANTA Respondent(s) IA No. 197992/2022 - VACATING STAY) IA NO. 2-IMPLEADMENT IA NO. 3-IMPLEADMENT IA NO. 67513/2017-IMPLEADMENT IA NO. 132860/2019-IMPLEADMENT IA NO. 13705/2020-EARLY HEARING IA NO. 153558/2022-IMPELADMENT IA NO. 197999/2022- EXEMPTION FROM FILING OT. Date : 01-02-2023 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA For Appellant(s) Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, A.A.G./AOR Mrs. Bihu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Adv. Mr. Akshay C. Shrivastava, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Shreeyash U. Lalit, Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Aniruddha Purshottam, Adv. Mr. Harsh Narwal, Adv.
Ms. Devika Khanna, Adv. Mrs. V.D. Khanna, Adv.
For M/s. Vmz Chambers, AOR Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR Mr. Akshay Verma, AOR Mr. Aman Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Rahul G Tanwani, Adv. Mr. M. Chandrakanth Reddy, Adv. Mr. Vishal Arun, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Marwah, AOR Mr. Parantap Singh, Adv.6
Mr. Tapan Masta, Adv.
Mr. Adhitya Sriavasan, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Applications for impleadment are allowed.
The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Pending applications stand disposed of.
[CHARANJEET KAUR] [POONAM VAID] ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH) [ Signed order is placed on the file ]