Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tarsem Singh vs Punjab State Warehousing Corporation ... on 1 June, 2023
Author: Pankaj Jain
Bench: Pankaj Jain
CWP No.20343 of 2015 (O&M) 1 2023:PHHC:080118 203 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.20343 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision : 01.06.2023 Tarsem Singh eee Petitioner versus Punjab State Warehousing Corporation & anr. __...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN REE Present :- Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harish Mehla, Advocate for Mr. Athar Ahmad, Advocate for the respondents. kkk PANKAJ JAIN, J. (QRAL) 1 Learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation has produced an order dated 01.06.2023 bearing No.PSWC/Admn/E- 7/Casual Labour-01/11085-89 dated 01.06.2023 and the same is taken on record as Mark 'X'. The same reads as under :- ORDER
1. In compliance to the orders of Hon'ble High Court dated 24.02.2023 in CWP No. 20343 of 2015 titled as Tarsem Singh v/s Punjab State Warehousing Corporation and another, a personal hearing was afforded to Sh. Tarsem Singh on dated 27.03.2023 and speaking order in the case was passed on 13.04.2023, wherein the claim of petitioner Sh. Tarsem Singh for regularization of service was rejected and ordered to be filed.
2. The CWP was then listed for hearing before the Hon'ble High Court on 25.04.2023 and Hon'ble HC was pleased to pass the following orders:
"This is an application for placing on record order dated 13th of April, 2023 (Annexure R-2).
For the reasons recorded in the application, the same is allowed. Order dated 13th of April, 2023 (Annexure R-2) is taken on record.POOJA SHARMA 2023.06.02 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No.20343 of 2015 (O&M) 2 2023:PHHC:080118 CWP-20343-2015 In compliance of the order date 24th of February, 2023, order dated 13th of April, 2023 has been placed on record. The only ground for denying the claim of the petitioner that has been spelled out in six pages order is that the petitioner being not matric on the date of consideration i.e. 20th of February, 2014 hence is not entitled for regularization even though he attained desired qualification on 17th of July, 2014.
Mr. Arora, Advocate counsel for the petitioner joins the issue and refers to RTI obtained by him placed on record as Annexure P-13 which is a list of more than 62 employees who were under matric and stand regularized even though they entered the services of the respondent- Corporation after the petitioner joined in the year 1994. Meaning thereby that all the 62 employees despite being junior to the petitioner and not matric qualified stand regularized yet the petitioner has not been and further presses into service of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Hari Nandan Prasad and another vs. Employer I/R to Management of FCI and another, (2014) 7 SCC 190 to submit that once persons junior to the petitioner have been regularized the petitioner would be entitled for the said relief and submits that in the said judgment the Apex Court had observed the contours of Uma Devi as well.
Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation is directed to file affidavit in the light of Annexure P-13 which is the list of employees junior to the petitioner and not matric but regularized in services before the next date of hearing to justify his order dated 13th of April, 2023.
Adjourned to 2nd of May, 2023".
3. In Compliance to the said orders of Hon'ble High Court dated 25.04.2023, an affidavit was filed by the General Manager (Establishment), which was taken on record by the Hon'ble Court on 02.05.2023 and following order was passed on the said date:-
"Affidavit of Amandeep Singh, General Manager (Establishment), Punjab State Warehousing Corporation has been filed. The same is taken on record.
Prima-facie it seems that order passed by Managing Director is in teeth of the affidavit filed today in the Court.
For further arguments, adjourned to 01.06.2023.
Learned counsel for the respondents will ascertain as to whether the petitioner was eligible for regularization when the employees as mentioned from Sr. No. 34 to 41 in the table of the affidavit filed today were granted regularization even though they were also not middle pass.
In the meantime, liberty is granted to the respondents to pass order afresh in compliance of order dated 24.02.2023."POOJA SHARMA 2023.06.02 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No.20343 of 2015 (O&M) 3 2023:PHHC:080118
4. In Compliance to the said order, the entire record pertaining to the case has been re-examined and it has surfaced that the employees as mentioned at Sr. No. 34 to 41 were regularized in the year 2003 under the policy dated 23.01.2001 of GoP as the same were in service at that time. Since, the petitioner was out of service at that point of time and the case before the Labour Court was pending adjudication, thus his case for regularization was not considered as per the said policy dated 23.01.2001.
5. The petitioner re-joined the services as Casual Labour on 17.01.2005. In the mean while, a new policy for regularization was circulated by the GoP in the year 2006 vide orders dated 15.12.2006.
6. The petitioner along with Sh. Balbir Singh represented for regularization of their services under the aforementioned policy of 2006. Ultimately, in compliance to the orders of Hon'ble High Court dated 04.10.2013 in CWP No. 16519 of 2011 titled as Tarsem Singh and another v/s PSWC and another, the services of Sh. Balbir Singh, who was found eligible as per aforementioned policy of 2006 was regularized on 26.02.2014, whereas the services of Sh. Tarsem Singh were not regularized being not eligible.
7. On acquiring matric qualification on 17.07.2014, Sh. Tarsem Singh again represented for regularization of his services in line with the regularization of services of Sh. Balbir Singh, which was declined on the ground that the policy dated 15.12.2006 provide regularization opportunity to all the candidates purely as a one time measure.
8. Sh. Tarsem Singh filed CWP No. 20343 of 2015, wherein he has prayed that his services be regularized by giving him parity with Sh. Balbir Singh, Casual Labour (Co- applicant) under the state government policy dated 15.12.2000.
9. In Compliance to the orders of Hon'ble High Court dated 02.05.2023, as re-produced in para no. 3 and keeping in view the fulfilment of eligibility of educational qualification by Sh. Tarsem Singh on 17.07.2014, considering his case in line with the case of Sh. Balbir Singh, the services of Sh. Tarsem Singh are hereby ordered to be regularized as helper w.ef 17.07.2014 in term with GoP policy dated 15.12.2006."
2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the aforesaid order and the fact that the petitioner has now been ordered to be regularised as Helper w.e.f. 17.07.2014 in terms of policy dated 15.12.2006 the primary grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. He, however, submits that no order has been passed with respect to consequential benefits.
3 Learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation submits that consequential benefits payable to the petitioner under aforesaid POOJA SHARMA 2023.06.02 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.20343 of 2015 (O&M) 4 2023:PHHC:080118 order by deeming him to be a regular employee w.e.f. 17.07.2014 shall be calculated and paid within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order passed in the present writ petition.
4 In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation and the order dated 01.06.2023 reproduced hereinabove, present writ petition is disposed off.
5 Respondents-Corporation shall remain bound by the statement made by its counsel and shall release the consequential benefits within the time period as prayed for.
(PANKAJ JAIN ) JUDGE 01.06.2023 Pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable : No POOJA SHARMA 2023.06.02 13:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document