Madhya Pradesh High Court
Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors vs Ku.Leena Jain & Ors on 20 August, 2013
W.P. NO.1974/1998 &
W.P. No.13440/2004
20/8/2013:
Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for respondents
in W.P. No.1974/1998.
Shri Gourav Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents in W.P. 13440/2004.
Challenging the order dated 13.11.1997 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in various cases directing the petitioner department to consider the claim of the respondents herein for regularization, these writ petitions have been filed.
Respondents were engaged as Data Entry Operators and while so working they raised the claim for regularization. It was their contention that they are working continuously since 1995 and therefore, they are entitled for regularization. When the matter was being adjudicated before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the department came out with a case that the respondents were engaged as piece rated employees, were paid remuneration in accordance to the work performed by them, they are not daily wages employees and therefore, they cannot be regularized. This contention was rejected and after taking note of the nature of work, the Tribunal directed for consideration of their claim. While the matter was pending before this Court, a Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition by a detailed order passed on 16.7.2003 and dismissed the writ petition by holding that the Tribunal has not committed any error in directing for consideration. The orders passed by this Court on 16.7.2003 was challenged by the Department before the Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition and by an order passed on 20 th November 2006, in Civil Appeal No.5074/2006 and other cases, matters have been remanded back to this Court with a direction that now in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Others Vs. Uma Devi and others reported in 2006(4) SCC 1 the High Court shall reconsider the matter. After remand by the Supreme Court, petitioners have filed an application I.A. No.61/2011 and have brought on record a Circular dated 26.12.2010 issued by the petitioner department in the matter of regularization of temporary, daily wages and casual employees so also contingency paid workers and a scheme for consideration in accordance to the law laid down in the case of Uma Devi is laid down in this Circular.
Once the direction of the Supreme Court was to consider the claim of the employees in the light of law laid down in the case of Uma Devi (supra) and when a Circular dated 26.12.2010 has been issued by the department for such consideration, we are of the considered view that now the matter has to go before the appropriate Committee constituted by the department and the said Committee is required to analysis the claim of each of the employees not only in accordance to the Circular but also keeping in view the law laid down in the case of Uma Devi (supra) and take a decision with regard to regularization or otherwise of the respondents employees.
In view of the above, both these petitions are disposed of with the following directions :
On the respondents employees filing a certified copy of this order along with relevant documents, the petitioner department shall refer the claim of each of the respondents to the appropriate Committee, constituted for the purpose. The Committee after examining the claim of each of the individual in the accordance to the Circular dated 26.12.2010 and the law laid down in the case of Uma Devi (supra) shall make its recommendation to the department and the department shall pass appropriate orders on the recommendation in accordance to law. The entire exercise in this regard be completed as far as possible within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid, both the petitions stand disposed of.
c.c. as per rules.
( Rajendra Menon ) ( R. S. Jha )
Judge Judge
mrs.mishra