Punjab-Haryana High Court
Michal Masih And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 24 August, 2017
CWP No.19188 of 2017 (O&M) 1
123 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.19188 of 2017 (O&M)
Date of decision : 24.08.2017
Michal Masih and others
...... Petitioners
versus
The State of Punjab and others
...... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI
***
Present : Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate
for the petitioners.
***
AJAY TEWARI, J.(ORAL)
By this petition the petitioners have challenged the order (Annexure P-6) whereby it has been decided that their services as Chowkidar will be terminated w.e.f. 26.08.2017 on account of the fact that no budget has been sanctioned for payment to them.
It has been brought out that earlier the petitioners were appointed on wages of Rs.2,500/- per month. Thereafter the same was reduced to Rs.1,500/-. At that stage some of them including petitioner No.3 filed CWP No.21929 of 2014 titled as Rupinderjit Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others which was decided on 26.07.2016 and as per that decision the respondents were directed to pay them minimum wages. It is alleged that having been enraged by that petition the respondents have now passed the impugned order against the petitioners.
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 01-09-2017 19:07:35 ::: CWP No.19188 of 2017 (O&M) 2 A perusal of that judgment, however, reveals that the Court had noticed as follows :-
"It is a conceded position that engagement of Chowkidars for doing night duty was never contemplated nor envisaged under the scheme................... It is a conceded position that petitioners and other similarly situated Chowkidars were engaged by the Medical Officers of their own choice without any advertisement or selection. The engagement is purely contractual and need based."
During that time also an allegation was made that services of one of those petitioners was being terminated. This Court held as follows :-
"At the time of hearing counsel for the petitioners submits that services of petitioner No.34-Darbara Singh are being dispensed with by Senior Medical Officer, Lalru on the ground of non-availability of funds. He thus prays for a stay of termination of his services.
The prayer is liable to be rejected in the light of nature of engagement. The officer concerned is fully competent to dispense with the engagement of the petitioner no.34 in case his services are not required or he has no funds to pay the honorarium."
That decision has become final. As per the impugned order which has been now passed the services are being terminated because no budget is provided for the services.
In the circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. It is however, clarified that in case at any stage these requirements of Chowkidars are felt the petitioners and other persons like them whose services may have been dispensed with on account of lack of funds would have a preferential right to be considered for appointment.
2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 01-09-2017 19:07:37 ::: CWP No.19188 of 2017 (O&M) 3 Petition stands disposed of.
Since the main case has been decided, the pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, also stands disposed of.
( AJAY TEWARI )
24.08.2017 JUDGE
pooja sharma-I
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 01-09-2017 19:07:37 :::