Punjab-Haryana High Court
Yad Ram vs State Of Haryana And Others on 7 December, 2012
Author: Augustine George Masih
Bench: Augustine George Masih
C.W.P. No.20452 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No.20452 of 2012
Date of Decision: December 07, 2012
Yad Ram
......PETITIONER
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
.....RESPONDENTS
C.W.P. No.22761 of 2012
Tej Pal and others
......PETITIONERS
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
.....RESPONDENTS
C.W.P. No.20065 of 2011
Ramesh Chand and others
......PETITIONERS
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present: Mr.P.S.Jammu, Advocate and
Mr.R.S.Budhwar, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Harish Rathee, Senior Deputy Advocate General,
Haryana for the respondents in CWP No.20065 of 2011.
C.W.P. No.20452 of 2012 2
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.
Vide this order, I propose of dispose of CWP No.20452 of 2012, titled as Yad Ram Vs. State of Haryana and others, CWP No.22761 of 2012, titled as Tej Pal and others Vs. State of Haryana and others and CWP No.20065 of 2011, titled as Ramesh Chand and others Vs. State of Haryana and others, as common questions of facts and law are involved in the present cases.
Petitioners in these writ petitions have approached this Court praying primarily for issuance of a writ of certiorari for setting aside the letter dated 18.08.2004 passed by respondent No.1 vide which 40 posts of Swasthya Sahayak have been abolished and this cadre of Swasthya Sahayak has been put in the diminishing cadre whereas there is shortage of spray staff in the Malaria Eradication Scheme and posts are lying vacant.
Counsel for the petitioners submit that the claim of the petitioner for regularization of the services is not being considered although there is a policy, which would entitle them to the claim of regularization which is dated 07.05.1991 (Annexure P-1), according to which, as and when a vacancy of Swasthya Sahayak becomes available during the season, appointment has to be made from the employees, who have been working on seasonal yearly basis which policy till date has not been revoked. His further contention is that the petitioners have been working with the respondent on seasonal basis for the last more than five years but the benefit has not been granted to them. He on this basis contends that the impugned order dated 18.08.2004 (Annexure P-4) cannot sustain and deserves to be set aside. C.W.P. No.20452 of 2012 3
I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners and when their assistance have gone through the record of the case.
The contention of counsel for the petitioners cannot be accepted in the light of the fact that the Government subsequent to the issuance of the policy decision dated 07.05.1991 as vide a memo dated 18.08.2004 decide to restructure the working of the government department and for that purpose the right sizing of the Health Department has been given effect to according to the said policy decision. Cadre of Swasthaya Sahayak has been placed in the diminishing cadre which means that as and when a post falls vacant, the said post shall be deemed to have been abolished.
In the light of this fact, prayer as made by the petitioners in the present writ petitions cannot be accepted. This Court in an earlier writ petition i.e. CWP No.2393 of 2012, titled as Lal Chand and others Vs. State of Haryana and others while dealing with the same situation vide order dated 30.11.2012 held as follows:
"In the light of the facts that specific averment has been made by the respondents in their reply that since the year 2000, there was a complete ban imposed on filling up the post of regular appointment. Therefore, against the post of Swasthya Sahayak, none has been appointed on regular basis. The assertion thus of the counsel for the writ petitioners that some persons were appointed in the year 2004-05 and 2006 cannot be accepted. Further, in the light of the policy decision of the Govt. of Haryana dated 18.08.2004 (Annexure R-2) wherein posts of Swasthya Sahayak and Field Workers on which the petitioners are claiming appointment on regular basis form part of the diminishing cadre, the claim for regularization of the petitioners cannot be accepted. The moment a vacancy becomes available, on the incumbent of the said posts C.W.P. No.20452 of 2012 4 relinguishing charge thereof, the post is deemed to have been abolished. There is thus no question of regularization the services of the petitioners against those posts."
In the light of the above, finding no merit in the present writ petitions and the same are dismissed.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE December 07, 2012 jt