Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramavtar Pateria vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 February, 2018
1 W.P. No. 14124/2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
SINGLE BENCH : JUSTICE MS.VANDANA KASREKAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 14124/2013
Ramavtar Pateria & Others
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the
petitioners.
Shri Rohit Sohgaura, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondents/State.
ORDER
(08.02.2018) The petitioners have filed the present petition challenging the order dated 01.02.2013 passed by respondent No. 2 whereby the claim of the petitioners for regularization on the post of Process Server has been turned down.
2. The petitioners were appointed on the post of Process Server. The petitioners continued to work on the post of Process Server by issuing orders from time to time. 2 W.P. No. 14124/2013 They were also granted the certificate of appreciation as well as character certificate by the respondent-authorities. The Revenue Department has issued an order dated 17.12.2008 thereby directing all the Collectors in the State of M.P. to appoint Process Server on permanent basis as per their seniority. The General Administrative Department also issued an order dated 06.09.2008 to regularize the employees, who are working on daily wages. The similarly situated Process Servers have been regularized by the State Government. However, the petitioners although working since 2007, there services have not been regularized. Therefore, they have submitted their representation, however, instead of submitting the said representation as nothing was done by the respondents, the petitioners have, therefore, filed a Writ Petition No. 20305/2012 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 07.12.2012 thereby directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the benefit granted to similarly situated employees. In pursuance of 3 W.P. No. 14124/2013 the directions issued by this Court, the petitioners have approached to respondent No. 2 for regularization by submitting a representation. The respondent No. 2 has issued an order dated 01.02.2013 thereby turning down the claim of the petitioners for regularization on the ground that since there is no Government order nor any sanctioned post, therefore, the petitioners cannot be regularized on the post of Process Server.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Process Servers who are similarly situated are still working on the said post and there are number of posts of Process Servers are vacant on which the services of the petitioners can be regularized.
4. The respondents have filed their reply and in the reply they have stated that in the case of Section Writers, the order passed by the Single Judge considering this aspect in all those cases, in which the daily wagers were regularized prior to the case of Umadevi and directed the authorities to consider and scrutinize the legality of the 4 W.P. No. 14124/2013 appointment order. The said order passed by the learned Single Judge was modified in Writ Appeal No. 606/2010. It has further been submitted that the order passed by the Collector after conducting scrutiny and there is no perversity or illegality in the order passed by the Collector.
5. During the pendency of this petition the petitioners have filed an I.A. No. 5681/2017 in which the petitioners have stated that this Court vide order dated 22.02.2016 has directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment on the post of Process Server. In light of the order passed by this Court, the petitioners have submitted a detailed representation (Annexure-P/14) stating that more than 24 posts of Process Severs are vacant in the District Chhatarpur. The Collector Chhatarpur has also sought permission vide letter dated 29.09.2016 for appointment of Process Server on temporary basis, however, the petitioners have not been considered on the said posts. In light of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for direction to the 5 W.P. No. 14124/2013 respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment on the posts of Process Server, in light of the fact that 24 posts of Process Server are vacant in the District Chhatarpur.
6. In light of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the documents which is filed by him along with I.A. No. 5681/2017, I deem it proper to disposed of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment on the post of Process Server which are lying vacant as per the chart Annexure-P/15 and the letter dated 29.09.2016 issued by the Collector within a period of four months.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, with no order as to costs.
(Ms.Vandana Kasrekar) Judge ashish Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Date: 2018.02.08 03:21:41 -08'00'