Bombay High Court
Ravindra Pralhadrao Chede vs Zilla Parishad Amravati & Another on 10 January, 2017
Author: B.P.Dharmadhikari
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
`wp.1230.00
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
...
WRIT PETITION NO. 1230/2000
Ravindra s/o Pralhadrao Chede,
Resident of Moti Nagar,
Amravati. ..PETITIONER
v e r s u s
1) Zilla Parishad, Amravati
Through Its Chief Executive officer,
Amravati.
2) Nandkishore s/o Rama Sagar
Resident of near Commissioner Colony
Near Circuit House, Amravati. ...RESPONDENTS
...........................................................................................................................
Adv. Anand Parchure with Adv. Dharaskar, for petitioner
Adv. J.B. Kasat, for Respondent No.1
Adv. S.Moharir, Advocate for Respondent No.2
............................................................................................................................
CORAM: B.P
. DHARMADHIKARI &
MRS . SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ
.
DATED : 10 January, 2017
th
ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Heard Advocate Parchure with Advocate Dharaskar for petitioner, Advocate Moharir for respondent no.2 and Advocate Kasat, for respondent no.1-Zilla Parishad.
2. Admittedly, both petitioner and respondent no.2 have joined employment in Ground Water Survey Development Agency (henceforth abbreviated to 'G.S.D.A'.), which is a Scheme, independent of employment ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 ::: `wp.1230.00 2 with Zilla Parishad. This issue may be in dispute by respondent no.2 and we are not required to look into it, at the stage.
3. It appears that respondent no.2 filed a Complaint before the Industrial Court vide ULP No. 502/1992 claiming permanency on the post of Mechanical Supervisor. During pendency of that Complaint, he was terminated and he filed Complaint (ULP)No.172/1995, before Labour Court.
His termination was set aside. His Complaint for regularisation was allowed by Industrial Court on 17.12.2007. This direction to regularise his employment was questioned by employer-Zilla Parishad, before this Court, in Writ Petition No.938/2009. This Court refused interim relief to employer on 29.7.2009 and Petition came to be finally dismissed on 10.10.2014.
Because of this litigation, employer has issued an order dated 17.3.2015 by which respondent no.2 is regularised on work-charge establishment as Junior Engineer, from the date of his entry i.e. from 14th March 1990. This order dated 17.3.2015 specifically mentions that the judgment of High Court dated 10.10.2014, was being questioned in Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Today, it is not in dispute that Hon'ble Apex Court has issued notice in that S.L.P.
4. Respondent no.1-employer, in the meanwhile, had issued an order dated 1.9.1998 to utilise services of respondent no.2 as Junior Engineer in Works Department. Against this order, petitioner who is admittedly senior in employment than respondent no.2, preferred a representation on ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 ::: `wp.1230.00 3 17.9.1998 and ultimately he approached the Divisional Commissioner.
Because of this representation and approach, on 3rd October,1998, the order was reversed and instead of respondent no.2, the petitioner was posted as Junior Engineer in Works Division.
5. The respondent no.2 had filed Writ Petition No. 3283/1998 before this Court complaining violation of principles of natural justice. It appears that present petitioner also filed Writ Petition No.3007/1999 pointing out his supersession. In Writ Petition No.3238/1998, the Division Bench of this Court on 9.12.1998 directed compliance with principles of natural justice i.e. to supply copy of representation of petitioner to respondent no.2 and to extend him an opportunity of hearing. The order dated 3rd October, 1998 passed without hearing him was, therefore, set aside and matter was restored back to the file of Divisional Commissioner.
6. In Writ Petition No.3007/1999, the employer pointed out that order dated 1.9.1998 conferring benefit upon respondent no.2 was already withdrawn and the said petition was, therefore, disposed of in this development, on 16th September,1999.
7. It is in this background that the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad, on 8th November, 1999 posted respondent no.2 in G.S.D.A. This order dated 8th November, 1999 was questioned by him in Appeal before Additional Commissioner, Amravati Division. Present petitioner sought intervention in those proceedings. It appears that said intervention was ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 ::: `wp.1230.00 4 allowed and said Appeal i.e. Appeal No.DB/MDSA /17/1999-2000 Amravati was decided on 16th February 2000, by Additional Commissioner. The Appeal was allowed and order dated 8.11.1999 was quashed and set aside.
Main reason which weighed with that authority is order dated 1.9.1998 by which respondent no.2 was given work and placement in Works Department of Zilla Parishad was not disturbed,
8. This order has been questioned by the petitioner before this Court. Prayer is that order should be quashed and set aside and order dated 8.11.1999 bringing respondent no.2 in G.S.D.A. should be restored. Petitioner claims that instead, he should be appointed as Junior Engineer (Sectional Engineer) in Works Division.
9. This Court on 19th April 2000, while issuing Rule in the matter, made it clear that respondent no.2 would continue to work in the scale of Rs. 425-900/- as fixed by Zilla Parishad, as Junior Engineer in Works Division where he was working since "1.8.1998". Before this Court, it is admitted position that mention of date "1.08.1998" in said order is incorrect and that date should be "01.09.1998".
10. Advocate Parchure, in this background, submits that considering better claim and better placement of petitioner, he ought to have been regularised first and treatment extended to respondent no.2 is nothing but an undue favouritism, in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
11. Advocate Moharir submits that respondent no.2 was vigilant ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 ::: `wp.1230.00 5 about his rights and, therefore, in order to assert the same, he approached the Industrial Court. Because of his efforts, the employer thought it proper to give him placement in Works Division and, accordingly, orders were passed.
He contends that now there is a direction to make him permanent vide order dated 17.3.2015 and as yet, there are no such orders in favour of petitioner.
He, therefore, submits that now respondent no.2 is better placed and hence intervention in exercise of writ jurisdiction is unwarranted.
12. Advocate Kasat for respondent no.1 submits that employment in Works Department of Zilla Parishad is public employment and nobody can enter it without participating in competitive selection process. The petitioner as also respondent no.2 were provided employment in Scheme work and,as such, they have no right to claim absorption in employment with Zilla Parishad. On 1.9.1998 considering the administrative exigency a temporary arrangement was made and in present facts, because of the litigation, that arrangement has continued. He, therefore, states that fate of respondent no.2 will be decided in SLP which is pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court, but respondent no.1 should be given liberty to place respondent no.2 back in G.S.D.A. by vacating interim orders dated 19.4.2000.
13. Perusal of records shows that controversy started in the wake of order dated 1.9.1998 when respondent no.1 provided work to respondent no.2 in Works Division and transferred him to that Division from G.S.D.A. The history narrated above, sufficiently shows the grievance made by the ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 ::: `wp.1230.00 6 present petitioner. The petitioner then felt that being senior, he should have been sent to Works Division instead of petitioner. That grievance was accepted by his employer and the situation was reversed. The further challenge before High Court and orders of High Court show that this reversal was found in violation of principles of natural justice, a transparent procedure and compliance with principles of natural justice was only directed by the Division Bench of this Court while disposing of Writ Petition No. 3283/1998, on 9.12.1998. The order dated 9.12.1998 of this Court, therefore, cannot be construed as waiver by present petitioner of his grievance against the order dated 1.9.1998.
14. Thus, the reason put forth by Additional Commissioner, Amravati while allowing Appeal of respondent no.2, is incorrect.
15. However, facts show that neither petitioner nor respondent no.
2 are recruited in employment of Zilla Parishad, they were recruited in G.S.D.A. and they continue as employees of G.S.D.A. The services of respondent no.2 are directed to be regualrised by Industrial Court and that issue is pending before Hon'ble Apex Court. Presently, the petitioner and respondent no.2 are both in employment and it is not the case of petitioner that he is placed on a post which is inferior to post of respondent no.2, in any manner. Thus, there is no legal injury to any of his rights and his seniority over and above respondent no.2, is also not lost.
16. At this point of time, we are not inclined to disturb placement ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 ::: `wp.1230.00 7 and working of respondent no.2. However, it is made clear that said placement and working is subject to orders of Hon'ble Apex Court in pending SLP. It is also made clear that whatever benefits are conferred upon respondent no.2 by respondent no.1, the same shall also stand extended to present petitioner automatically as present petitioner is senior to respondent no.2.
17. Hence, with this clarification and with direction to respondent no.1 to extend those benefits to petitioner after adjudication by Hon'ble Apex Court and contingent upon it, we partly allow this Writ Petition and dispose it of.
18. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/01/2017 00:46:49 :::