Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. The four petitioners herein working as contingent /casual workers in the office of Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (PCCF), Itanagar, Divisional Forest Office, (DFO), Social Forestry Division, Itanagar and Range Forest Officer, (RFO), Social Forestry Division, Naharlagun under the Department of Forest and Environment., Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh. Grievance raised by the petitioners herein is that they are deprived of their regularisation of service by the respondent authorities. It is submitted that the Department of Forest and Environment, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh have 35 number of vacancies of Group D post and all Arunachal Pradesh Workers Union has submitted a representation on 9.10.2012 for appointment of casual/contingent workers on regular/adhoc basis who have attained the service of 10 to 15 years to avoid random appointments, similar appointment of contingent workers that has been given to one Smti Ruhi Taru Yatung.

4. The respondent nos. 1 to 12 in their affidavit in opposition as well as additional affidavit has seriously contended that the petitioners have filed this case by suppressing certain material facts. One of the petitioners Dopi Kamsi, a contingent worker in the office of PCCF has participated in the interview conducted by the Departmental Selection Committee held on 23.3.2015 but she could not compete the other candidates. The other three petitioners who were working as casual basis or daily wages basis under the office of DFO, Social Forestry Division so there is no question of calling them for interview in PCCF Office. As the office of DFO has also been allotted two number of posts of peon and conducted the recruitment through DPC (vide Annexure-1 DPC held on 23.3.2015).

6. Regarding formulation of total number of 33 posts, 13 number posts are stated to be reserved for different categories and remaining 20 posts have been distributed to the circles and divisions. 4 number of posts have been filled up in the PCCF office by holding DSC from amongst the existing casual/contractual workers, after obtaining approval from the State Govt. with special dispensation of open advertisement and relaxation of educational qualification as mentioned above, on the seniority cum merit. The same procedure was also followed in different circles. Accordingly it has been contended that the claim of the petitioner that the respondent authorities have filled up the Group D posts without conducting an interview is wrong. It has been specifically stated that respondent nos. 13 and 14 have been appointed by DFO , Social Forestry by conducting DPC as against two posts of Group D allotted to the said division, from the existing casual contingency workers. Similarly the other respondent nos. 15 to 18 were also appointed on merit by the establishment of PCCF by conducting DSC. Hence, There is no illegality or irregularity in their appointment.

10. The respondents herein both official and private in their affidavits have specifically pleaded and asserted that Smti Ruhi Taru Yatung was appointed on Adhoc basis with the approval of the State Govt. and thereafter a memorandum from All Arunchal Pradesh Forest Workers Union dated 9.10.2012 was filed for appointing the other candidate on Adhoc appointment also. On consideration of office file No.FOR.291/E-5/B /2015, it reveals that the aforesaid representation made by the Petitioners Association was put up before the PCCF and Principal Secretary (E & F) and on 1.11.2012 following note was given by the PCCF and Principal Secretary (E & F):