Delhi High Court
M.S. Rawat & Ors. vs Indian Council Of Medical Research & ... on 1 January, 1999
Equivalent citations: 77(1999)DLT781, 1999(48)DRJ525
Author: K. Ramamoorthy
Bench: K. Ramamoorthy
ORDER K. Ramamoorthy, J.
1. The petitioners have claimed for regularisation on the ground, though they were appointed only for a particular project. They have been working for more than about 10 years and therefore, the respondents cannot dispense with the services of the petitioners.
2. The first respondent has stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioners were appointed only for a particular project and the petitioners were well aware of the position and the project is over and no question of regularisation of the services of the petitioners would arise.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. A.P.S. Gambir referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Anil Chander & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. C.W. (civil) No. 273/88. The judgment is as under:
"The petitioners who were appointed temporarily in the Research Projects assigned to the National Institute of Communicable Diseases by the Indian Council of Medical Research under the Ministry of Health. They were appointed during the years 1984-85. In the Writ Petition the petitioners have prayed that the order dated February 29, 1988 terminating their services may be quashed and appropriate writ/order or direction be issued to the respondents to absorb them under the Scheme of Absorption. Under the impugned order dated February 29, 1988 the termination of services of the Petitioners was to take effect from March 31, 1988 but in view of the interim order passed by this Court on March 30, 1988 the petitioners have been continuing in service. Two of the petitioners, namely Anil Chander, Petitioner No.1 and Poonam Nag Petitioner No.6 have already resigned and they are no longer having any interest in the Writ Petition.
After hearing Shri M.L. Verma the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri V.C. Mahajan the learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction that if and when regular vacancies on the posts held by them or on similar posts are available in the National Institute of Communicable Diseases or in any other Institution under the Ministry of Health the petitioners may be absorbed on such posts on regular basis since the petitioners have been working for nearly 12 years. Till they are so absorbed their services shall not be discontinued.
4. Mr. Sikri, the learned senior counsel for the first respondent submitted that the facts before the Supreme Court were entirely different and the decision of the Supreme Court would not apply to the facts of this case. The learned senior counsel for the first respondent Mr. Sikri referred to the judgement of this court reported in Krishna Gaur Vs. AIIMS and ICMR CW No. 2003/91 (decided on 28.02.1992) and in Dr. Sheela Roy and others Vs. UOI and others 1993 (3) Delhi Laywers 9 DB. The learned senior counsel for the 1st and 2nd respondents referred to the judgment of the Madras High Court in Ramachandra and Others Vs. Director, VCRC (Vector Control Research Centre), Medical Complex, Pondicherry (ICMR) The learned senior counsel also referred to the judgment of M.P. High Court at Jabalpur reported in Ms. Suneeta Sain Vs. Dean, Gandhi Medical College, Bhopa - M.P. No. 1921/90 decided on 29.09.92. The learned senior counsel also referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Delhi Development Horticulture Employees Union Vs. Delhi Admn. .
5. I am of the view that having regard to the facts and circumstances and the purpose for which the petitioners were appointed and the project relat-
ing to Malaria Research being offered to the petitioners they cannot claim any relaxation. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.