Writ petition seeking quashing of surplus order and regularization of services was disposed of as respondent confirmed regular appointment basis, rendering the petition redundant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CWP No. 1571 of 1994
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No. 1571 of 1994 Date of Decision : 11.01.2012
Suraj Paul and others
....Petitioners
Versus
Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala & others
....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present: Mr. Lalit Thakur, Advocate for Mr. Anand Chhibbar, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr. Ranvir S. Chauhan, DAG Punjab
Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Advocate for respondent NO. 1
Paramjeet Singh, J.
The instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order, making the petitioners surplus in the respondent Department and for mandamus, directing the respondent to regularize the services of the petitioners, with effect from their date of appointments.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were appointed on different posts on ad hoc basis in the respondent Department – Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala. Suraj Paul -Petitioner No. 1 had joined on 15.04.1977 and Malook Singh -Petitioner No. 2 had joined on 10.02.1977. Initially, the appointment of the petitioners as Peons were for a period of one or two months and they were given fresh appointments, after a break of 2-3 days. Since the year 1978, they had been working continuously, but their services have not been regularized. It is submitted by the petitioners
2
CWP No. 1571 of 1994
that earlier their appointments were with the Hydel Project, Division NO. 1, Amritsar. In pursuance to letter No.806 & 809 dated 08.07.1993, the Executive Engineer, Hydel Project, Division No.1, Amritsar informed the petitioners that they have become surplus and are relieved w.e.f. 9th July, 1993. It was also directed in the notice (Annexure P-2) that they should meet the Chief Engineer, M&MHP, Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala for appropriate transfer. In pursuance to those transfer orders, they have been absorbed by the Electricity Board. Adjustment of the petitioners have been made in pursuance to Annexure P-6 in the Punjab State Electricity Board (for short P.S.E.B).
The grievance of the petitioners is that their services have not been regularized. The Executive Engineer, Hydel Project filed reply stating that emoluments of I.B. staff are drawn from the Treasuries of Punjab Government, then they are paid by the P.S.E.B. to the government. This is an adjustment and for the P.S.E.B. staff, emoluments are drawn out of the direct funds of the P.S.E.B. Expenditure is directly met with from the direct funds of the P.S.E.B. The P.S.E.B. filed separate reply and stated that petitioners have been appointed by the Irrigation Department, in violation of the instructions of the Electricity Board as well as decision taken by the Hydel Committee on 28.01.1961. There was complete ban for recruitment of the staff. Petitioners were appointed by the Irrigation Department, as such, the P.S.E.B. has no responsibility. The petitioners had been rendered surplus on completion of the project. So, the responsibility lies with the Irrigation Department, as appointment are in violation of the instructions of the Board.
3
CWP No. 1571 of 1994
It has been admitted by the Hydel committee, Executive Engineer, Hydel Project, Division No. 1, Amritsar in his reply, in para No. 2 on merit that the petitioners were appointed on 15.4.1977 and 10.02.1977 respectively on regular basis by the XEN, Hydel Project, Division No. 1, Amritsar on P.S.E.B. Cadre, being competent authority. Suraj Paul was initially appointed on ad hoc basis w.e.f. 20th September, 1976 as S.C.C.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
When the matter was heard, the learned counsel for respondent No.1 – P.S.E.B., after seeking instructions from the official of the P.S.E.B., made a statement that the appointment of the petitioners are on regular basis. Since the services of the petitioners were on regular basis, so, there is no question of further regularization of their services.
In view of the statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.1 – P.S.E.B. , the writ petition is disposed of, as only relief prayed for in the writ petition was regulation of their services. So far as the relief with regard to quashing of order of the petitioner, being surplus, is concerned, this has also become redundant, as, after being declared surplus from the Hydel Project, Division No. 1, Amritsar, they joined P.S.E.B. Now, they are on the P.S.E.B. rolls. No further relief can be granted.
In these terms, the writ petition is disposed of.
( PARAMJEET SINGH ) JUDGE
January 11, 2012 kamal
Suraj Paul and others
Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala & others
Paramjeet Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
