Shankar Kumar Dhara vs The Hon'Ble Chief Justice High Court on 29 March, 2012

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Shankar Kumar Dhara vs The Hon'Ble Chief Justice High Court on 29 March, 2012

Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas

                                                  1


                                   In The High Court At Calcutta
                                   Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
                                           Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas

                                  W.P.No.431 (W) of 2008
                              Shankar Kumar Dhara
                                         v.
              The Hon'ble Chief Justice High Court, Calcutta & Ors.


       Mr. P.S. Bhattacharyya                         ...for the petitioner

       Mr. Jaydeep Kar                                ...for the High Court

Heard on: March 29,2012.

Judgment on: March 29,2012.

       The Court:- The petitioner in this art. 226 petition dated January 8, 2008 is seeking
the following principal relief:
        "(a) to issue a Writ of or in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents-

authorities to consider Your petitioner's case by absorbing him in the post of Group "D" category either on the Original Side or Appellate Side of this Hon'ble Court, having regard to his long and harrowing wait in the panel of " Badli Workers" ever since his entry in the panel, prepared and maintained on the Original Side of this Hon'ble Court."

The petitioner claims that he was working as a Badli Worker engaged by the administration of this Court. His case is that for undisclosed reasons the number of the Badli Workers on the list in which his name was included was downsized. According to him, having worked as a Badli Worker for a considerable period, he has acquired a right to absorption in the employment of this Court on a permanent basis.

The petitioner was never engaged or appointed according to the recruitment rules. He was engaged as a Badli Worker on an as and when his services as such were needed basis. Having worked as such, he could not and actually did not acquire any right to get an employment in this Court on a permanent basis.

For making appointments to Group-D posts requisite recruitment process was initiated. Principles stated by the Supreme Court in Uma Devi were followed. The petitioner could apply. He did not apply. An order cannot be passed directing the administration of this Court to consider the question of absorbing him in its employment on a permanent basis.

For these reasons, the WP is dismissed. No costs. Certified xerox.

Sh(c);ab(f)                                                       (Jayanta Kumar Biswas,J)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)