Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
J Viswanatham vs M/O Mines on 24 September, 2021
OA/931/2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH
HYDERABAD
OA/021/931/2016
Date of CAV :07.09.2021
Date of Pronouncement :24.09.2021
Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Judl. Member
Hon'ble Mr. B.V. Sudhakar, Admn. Member
1. J. Viswanatham, S/o. J. Sathaiah,
Aged about 43 years,
Occ: Casual Labourer (Peon),
O/o. Deputy Director General, Southern Region,
Geological Survey of India, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.
2. K. Manemma, W/o. K. Anjaiah,
Aged about 45 years,
Occ: Casual Labourer (Sweeper),
O/o. Deputy Director General, Southern Region,
Geological Survey of India, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.
3 . Sayeeda, W/o. Late Hyderpasha,
Aged about 45 years,
Occ: Casual Labourer (Sweeper),
O/o. Deputy Director General, Southern Region,
Geological Survey of India, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.
4. E. Yengamma, W/o. Subbaiah Naidu,
Aged about 47 years,
Occ: Casual Labourer (Sweeper),
O/o. Deputy Director General, Southern Region,
Geological Survey of India, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad.
5. K. Sattamma, W/o. K. Anjaiah,
Aged about 46 years,
Occ: Casual Labourer (Peon),
O/o. Deputy Director General, Southern Region,
Geological Survey of India, Bandlaguda, Hyderabad. AP. ... Applicants
(By Advocate : Dr. A. Raghu Kumar)
Vs.
1. Union of India rep by its Secretary,
Ministry of Mines, Department of Mines,
New Delhi.
2. The Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
No.27, JL N Road, Kolkata.
3. The Deputy Director General,
Geological Survey of India,
Southern Region, Bandlaguda,
Hyderabad.
...Respondents
(By Advocate:Smt. K. Rajitha, Sr. CGSC)
Page 1 of 5
OA/931/2016
ORDER
(As per Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Judl. Member) The present O.A. is filed seeking the following relief:
"In view of the above facts and circumstances the applicant herein prays that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the cases of the applicants for grant of status / regularization against the vacant / created / sanctioned posts since 2013 in terms of the orders of this Hon'ble Tribunal dated 11.09.2013 O.A.No.3/2012 on the simple and technical ground that the orders of Hon'ble Tribunal have lapsed and now proposing to fill up the posts by notifying the same to the Staff Selection Commission ignoring the pending claims of the applicants is bad in law, arbitrary and violative of Article 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct them to consider the cases of the applicant for Temporary Status / regularization against the existing MTS posts referred to SSC before taking up Direct Recruitment in the interest of justice, and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants are working as Casual Workers with the respondents from various dates between 1990 and 1993 and have completed more than 26 years of service. The Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training, introduced a Scheme called Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of Government of India, 1993 which came into effect from 01.09.1993. It is submitted that this Tribunal disposed of OA No.3/2012 filed by Applicants No.1 to 4 of this O.A. vide order dated 11.9.2013 with a direction to the respondents that in case any direct recruitment takes place for MTS posts within two years from that day, the cases of the five applicants may be considered for conferment of temporary status by not recruiting candidates in 5 vacancies. It is submitted by the applicants that though the respondents approached the Hon'ble High Court at Hyderabad in W.P. Page 2 of 5 OA/931/2016 No.21260/2014, they could not obtain any interim orders and the Writ Petition is pending. Now the department proposes to go for direct recruitment for the vacant MTS posts which were said to be 32 as on March 2013 as per the information supplied under RTI by the Central Public Information Officer, Geological Survey of India. As per the applicants, when they approached the respondents they were informed that due to lapse of two years of time stipulated in the order dated 11.9.2013 in OA No.3/2012, their cases cannot be considered. Aggrieved over the same, the applicants have approached this Tribunal seeking the above said relief.
3. Notices were issued. Respondents have filed reply wherein they have stated that the applicants were neither permanent nor contract persons. The work rendered by the applicants cannot be classified as regular work. They were never allotted any specific duties like Peon, Sweeper, etc. They were engaged seasonally on need basis for miscellaneous and non-specified works and they were never engaged on contract basis and no regular salary was paid to them. A worker intermittently engaged for seasonal and non-specific work purely on need basis is not entitled for grant of temporary status as per the O.M. dated 10.9.1993. The applicants, who are over aged with no required qualifications, were engaged on outsourcing basis i.e. 'no work, no wage' basis. As they are not having the requisite norms as laid down by the DOPT, their claim for regularization of services cannot be acceded to. It is further submitted by the respondents that all Group 'D' posts are merged as 'Multi Tasking Staff' and now these posts are classified as Group 'C' and the required qualification is Matriculation Page 3 of 5 OA/931/2016 or equivalent. It is categorically stated by the respondents that even though requisitions were given to Staff Selection Commission to fill up the vacancies of Multi Tasking Staff, the same were cancelled and as of now there is no requisition pending with the Staff Selection Commission. Lastly, the respondents have prayed for dismissal of the O.A.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the pleadings on record.
5. The short issue raised in this O.A. has already been considered by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in OA No.3/2012 along with all other aspects of the case and passed the following order:
"10. With all this, there appears to be no dispute that the applicants are working with the respondents since 1983, intermittently, whenever work was available.
11. Learned counsel for the applicants now contends that the cadre strength of the Multi Tasking Staff (MTS) in the respondent's organization is enhanced from 52 to 84 i.e. by 32 numbers and in those vacancies, instead of going for direct recruitment, the cases of the applicants may be considered. The applicants are only five in number and in case the respondents are going for direct recruitment from open market, the cases of the applicants cannot be considered for direct recruitment, as obviously, they would be over-aged, as even according to them, they have been working for more than 25 years, the applicants have not given their ages in the O.A. On humanitarian grounds, the cases of the applicants deserve consideration, as they have been working for decades, almost since more than 30 years now. As such, in case any direct recruitment takes place for MTS posts within two years from today, the cases of the five applicants herein may be considered for conferment of temporary status by not recruiting candidates in (5) vacancies.
12. O.A. is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs."Page 4 of 5
OA/931/2016
6. The matter has already been adjudicated by this Tribunal and we are of the opinion that there is no point in disagreeing with the earlier order passed by this Tribunal. There is no reason as to why we should not follow the above said order and take shelter of it. Therefore, we direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicants by adopting the relaxed standards, keeping in view the order dated 11.9.2013 passed by this Tribunal in OA No.3/2012.
7. With the above observation, the O.A. is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(B.V. SUDHAKAR) (ASHISH KALIA)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
/pv/
Page 5 of 5