Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. Perusal of the documents enclosed with the writ petition reveal that in view of the request made by Chairman, Permanent Lok Adalat, the outsourcing agency (UPNL) sponsored petitioners for serving on contract as Munsirim/Reader and term and conditions of their engagement were indicated in a written contract executed between UPNL and Permanent Lok Adalat.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioners were engaged after due selection, therefore, their engagement cannot be referred as irregular and they cannot be disengaged, however there is no material on record 2025:UHC:8161 to show that petitioners were engaged after facing process of selection in which all eligible persons had opportunity to participate.

7. From the material on record, it is revealed that Chairman, Permanent Lok Adalat asked the outsourcing agency to supply manpower and UPNL in turn, sponsored name of the petitioners; the process of selection does not appear to have undertaken while sponsoring the name of petitioners. Even otherwise also, registration with UPNL (outsourcing agency) does not involve selection and any person who meets the eligibility criteria can get himself registered, who then can be sponsored for employment. The writ petition is absolutely silent regarding the stage at which petitioners were subjected to process of selection.

8. In the present case, petitioners are not directly employed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, but they are engaged through UPNL, which is an agency formed to supply manpower. A contractual employee engaged through UPNL cannot be treated as substantively appointed in Permanent Lok Adalat. Thus, petitioners do not have any right to hold the post.

9. The agreement executed between Chairman, Permanent Lok Adalat and Uttarakhand Purva Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. (UPNL) is enclosed as Annexure-6 to the writ petition. The workmen, 2025:UHC:8161 which UPNL undertook to supply, are indicated in Clause 2 of the contract. Clause 3 indicates that contract was for a duration of 11 months. The wages payable to the outsourced workmen are indicated in Clause 4. Clause 7 indicates that the amount payable as wages, shall be paid by Permanent Lok Adalat to UPNL and UPNL shall ensure payment thereof to the workmen.

10. Learned State Counsel drew attention of this Court to Clause 21 & 22 of the contract. Clause 21 (b) provides that if performance of the workmen sponsored by UPNL is not found satisfactory, then Permanent Lok Adalat shall have the right to change such employee under intimation to UPNL. Sub-clause (c) of Clause 21 provides that if services of an outsourced employee are no more required due to appointment or transfer of regular employee in his place, then Permanent Lok Adalat will give intimation of the same to the employee, under intimation to UPNL to terminate his/her services. Clause 22 of the contract further provides that contractual employees, employed through outsourcing, will not claim permanent employment with Permanent Lok Adalat.