Allahabad High Court
Manoj Kumar Sharma And 4 Others vs Union Of India And 2 Others on 21 September, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:183039 Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15839 of 2023 Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Sharma And 4 Others Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari,Vineet Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Ugrasen Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Heard Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Shri Ugrasen Kumar Pandey, learning counsel for the Respondents-1 to 3.
The case of the writ petitioner is that the Kendriya Hindi Sansthan is an autonomous educational institute governed by the Autonomous Observation namely Kendriya Hindi Shiksha Mandal established in the year 1961 by the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Human Resources, Government of India.
According to the writ petitioner, Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Agra, the third respondent is an institute of Higher Education for the purposes of imparting teaching course of different nature preparing Hindi Teacher and development of Hindi and is run by the Kendriya Hindi Shiksha Mandal, the autonomous body established by the Government of India and it answers the definition of the State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. As per the writ petitioners, who are five in number, they being fully eligible and qualified in all respects were engaged on contract basis on the post of Care-Taker, Data Operator, Library Clerk and Clerk on different dates, i.e. 03.12.2015, 18.01.2007, 16.01.2006, 31.03.2016 and 20.04.2012. According to the writ petitioner, though they were engaged on contractual basis, but they were accorded extension from time to time lastly on 27.07.2023. It is the further case of the writ petitioner that they are fully eligible and qualified in all respects and are continuously discharging the duties since their initial engagement, but without considering their claim for regularization/ absorption, now the impugned advertisement no. 7 of 2023 has been published by the respondents inviting the application for the appointment on permanent basis on the post of Lower Divisional Clerk (Level-2) and Library Clerk (Level-2) in Pay-band of Rs.19,900-63,200 stipulating the last date of application form being 15.05.2023.
It is further the case of the writ petitioner that in view of the law laid down by the Hon?ble Apex Court in case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi and others, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 (paragraph-53), the Hon'ble Apex Court has propounded the law that as a one time exception, exercise should be conducted for the purposes of regularization or absorption of those engagees, who had been working for a period of 10 years without any umbrella of interim protection by the Court of law. While inviting the attention towards paragraph-22 of the writ petition, it is being sought to be contended that the written examination has already been conducted yesterday, i.e. on 20.09.2023 and the writ petitioners have been discriminated in such a manner so as to even exclude them for being allowed to participate in the said selection, particularly, in view of the fact that already as per the terms and conditions so stipulated in paragraph-6 of the norms applicable for selection, which is Annexure-7 at page-43, relevant extract from page-44, assertion at para-15 of the paper book. The age relaxation ought to have been accorded by the writ petitioner and further drawing attention towards paragraph-24 and 25, it is being further contended that the writ petitioners though had been working on contractual basis are now over-aged, but age relaxation as well as the experience obtained by them ought to have been a ground for according preference to them.
Prayer in the present petition is for quashing of the advertisement no.7 of 2023 published by Registrar, Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Agra in so far as it relates to the post of Lower Divisional Clerk (Level-2) and the Library Clerk (Level-2) and a mandamus be issued to consider the case of the writ petitioner for regularization against the existent post, which is lying vacant and also sought to be advertised.
Sri Ugrasen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for Respondents 1to 3 submits on instructions that by a judicial fiat, this Court would direct for regularization of the services of the writ petitioner, as regularization is subject to the Rules being framed therein and availability of the vacancies coupled with the suitability and the eligibility. He further submits that though the Constitution Bench in Uma Devi (supra) has propounded the law as encapsuled in paragraph-53 of the judgment that as a one time exception, consideration is to be made for regularization/ absorption while issuing circulars or the Rules giving benefit to the engagees provided they are continuing in service for a period of 10 years without the interim protection, however, so far as the claim of the writ petitioner to resist the advertisement is concerned, the same cannot detain the Court any more particularly in view of the fact that the terms of the engagement itself specified that the writ petitioners, who are five in number were engaged on temporary basis/ contractual basis and in absence of any challenge being raised to the same, the writ petitioners cannot get any relief. However, Sri Pandey, who appears for the Respondents submits that the writ petitioners may raise their claim before the third respondent, Kendriya Hindi Sansthan, Agra, which would be considered with most expedition within a period of three weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
To the said submission, learned counsel for the writ petitioners has no objection to the same and gracefully accepts the same.
Considering the submission of the rival parties as well as the stand taken by them, the writ petition is being disposed off without seeking any response from the respondents granting liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the third respondent, along with a comprehensive representation accompanied with self-attested copy of the writ petition and on the receipt of the same, the third respondent shall proceed to decide the entitlement and claim of the writ petitioners while passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order bearing in mind the following fundamental and core issues: (a) the claim set up by the writ petitioner for regularization/ absorption in view of paragraph-53 of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Uma Devi (supra), (b) the issue with regard to age relaxation and preference; and (c) any other ancillary or incidental issues connected with the same.
Needless to point out that the writ petitioner has been decided on the basis of the averments made in the writ petition and the arguments advanced by the parties, thus passing of this order may not be construed to an expression that this Court has adjudicated the matter on merits and the third respondent shall pass an order strictly in accordance with law with independent application of mind without being influenced or obsessed with any of the observations made hereinabove.
With the aforesaid observations the writ petition stands disposed off.
Order Date :- 21.9.2023 N.S.Rathour