Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"iii a - Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and quashing the Government Order dated 14.01.2020, (Annexure No.10 to this Writ Petition).

iii b - Issue a writ, order or direction in the mandamus commanding the respondents to continue the petitioner as a Work Instructor on a Contractual basis in the Government Polytechnic, Kashipur and Government Polytechnic, Nainital."

4. In order to answer the reliefs which had been sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the present Writ Petition, few facts, which are admitted by the petitioner are that the petitioner was engaged as a Workshop Instructor in the Government Polytechnic, Shaktifarm, on 4th September, 2009. Though it is not in dispute that the nature of appointment of the petitioner as given to him in 2009, was contractual in nature and it was to continue in the capacity of being a Guest Lecturer, invited from time to time for the different academic years for imparting education to the students of the Polytechnic. However, when the action was being proceeded to be taken by the respondents of discontinuance of the services of the petitioner, he preferred a Writ Petition before this Court, being Writ Petition No. 445 of 2019, which was disposed of by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgment of 7th March, 2019, issuing directions to the Director, Technical Education, to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 22nd February, 2019, for the purposes of re-engaging the petitioner on a contract basis.

9. As a consequence of the amendment, which was sought by the petitioner, it is being argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the amendment was nothing, but as a consequence and with an intention to purge the proceedings of the Contempt Petition No. 545 of 2019, Jeewan Lal Vs. Om Prakash and another, which the petitioner has initiated for the non compliance of the interim orders dated 25.07.2019, passed by the Court in the Writ Petition.

10. The amendment thus preferred by the petitioner since was allowed and the new relief was permitted to be incorporated and as it was to the effect giving a challenge to the Government Order, by virtue of which, the post of Instructor in the Government Polytechnic, was abolished. As far as the amended relief pertaining to giving challenge to the Government Order dated 4th January, 2020, by virtue of which, the post of Workshop Instructor in the Govt. Polytechnic, Shaktifarm, was abolished, I am of the view that this Government Order, is exclusively an executive direction, which is falling well within the ambit and competence of the State, to take a decision whether to continue with the post or to abolish, and the said executive direction for abolition of the post, as it has been done by the impugned Government Order No. 80/XLI-I/20-20/13 dated 14th January, 2020, the State Government took a decision, whereby, one post of Workshop Instructor was abolished, would be well within the decision making power of the State, which cannot be faulted in any manner, under law, because it is always the employer who has to determine the number of employees, which are required by him.

14. During the course of argument, the learned counsel for the petitioner has ultimately harped upon to press his relief from the perspective that in the other Govt. Polytechnics, there are available vacancies of Workshop Instructors, against which, the petitioner could be adjusted, by their placement in those Government Polytechnic where the vacancies on the post of Workshop Instructors exists.

15. First of all, this relief does not fall to be within the ambit of consideration in the Writ petition because, it falls to be outside the purview of the Writ Petition itself, and as per the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court as reported in (2006) 6 SCC 666, Anup Kumar Kundu Vs. Sudip Charan Chakraborty and others, and (2010) 1 SCC 234, Bharat Amratlal Kothari and another Vs. Dosukhan Samadkhan Sindhi and others, which provides that the High Court, while deciding the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot travel beyond the controversy raised before it or beyond the relief, which has been claimed in the Writ Petition. Paragraph 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37 and 42 of the judgment of Bharat Amaratlal Kothari (Supra) are extracted hereunder :-

16. Hence, no direction as such could be issued to the respondents, to adjust the petitioner against the vacant post of Workshop Instructor, which is otherwise available in other Government Polytechnics, which is exclusively falling within the exclusive administrative domain of those Government Polytechnics.

17. There is another reason for not to accept the plea of the petitioner to adjust him, against the other vacant posts available in the Government Polytechnic, and it is on the ground that, as already observed above, the petitioner's appointment as Workshop Instructor, though made in 2021, was on a contractual basis and he would not carry any lien as such to continue to work, against the sanctioned cadre strength of the Workshop Instructor, which otherwise stood abolished by the impugned Government Order dated 14th January, 2020, and as the consequence of the abolition of the post, will not amount to that his discontinuance in service was taking a shape of retrenchment, whereby, he could be adjusted in the other Govt. Polytechnics, as it has been prayed for, to bring it within the purview of Industrial Law, of absorption of retrenched employee.