In this CWP, petitioners challenging replacement of their contractual employment for fire staff role filed Writ Petition. Court found no merit as employment was via service provider not direct state. Dismissed appeal.
Petition dismissed as petitioners have no vested right to resist new contractor recruitment.
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.
KUMAR MANOJ #1# 2015.02.06 12:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP No.14719 of 2014 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.14719 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.7.2014
Salender Kumar and Others
.............Petitioners
v.
State of Haryana and Others
.............Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:- Mr. Arvind Rajotia, Advocate for the petitioners.
Jaswant Singh,J
Petitioners have filed the present writ petition for quashing of the impugned Communication dated 11.7.2014 (P.2) vide which respondent No.4 has intimated respondent No.5 regarding the acceptance of tender notice by Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa for employment of Fire Staff on contract basis in Municipal Council, Sirsa (for short “M.C”)
The sole contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that since the petitioners are already working on contract basis with the M.C on contract basis through respondent No.5-Contractor since 2007 and thus, they cannot be replaced by other contractual staff. Learned counsel cites a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Hargurpratap Singh v. State of Punjab and Others (2007) 13 Supreme Court Cases 292 as well as this Court passed in CWP No.3794 of 2013 on 21.2.2013 titled Dharmender Vs. State of Haryana
CWP No.14719 of 2014 (O&M)
#2#
and Others.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and going through the paper book, this Court finds no merit in the petition and the same deserves dismissal.
A perusal of the impugned communication dated 11.7.2014 (P.2) reveals that 26 Firemen and 10 Fire Drivers are to be employed on contract basis as per the Outsourcing Policy of the State Government and in this regard, the tenders rates submitted by respondent No.5Contractor were accepted by the Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa and thus the man power is to be supplied by the Contractor. It is also stipulated in the said letter that Firemen as well as Fire Drivers should fulfil the requisite qualification as per the Government Notification dated 5.2.1982 and in this regard, an Advertisement was to be published in the Newspaper upto 11.7.2014 so that the candidates may be selected by the Committee after an interview on 28.7.2014.
It is not in dispute that an Advertisement in this regard has been published by the Contractor in the Newspaper dated 15.7.2014 (P.3) for engagement of the man power.
In view of the above, it is apparently clear that it is the contractual obligation of respondent No.5-Contractor to supply the man-power to respondent No.4-Council and thus, the petitioners cannot claim any vested right in perpetuity.
So far as the judgments cited on behalf of petitioners are concerned, the same are not applicable to the facts of the present case
CWP No.14719 of 2014 (O&M) #3#
since in those cases the ad hoc/contractual employees were employed either by the State Government or the Government Department and not
through service provider/Contractor.
Dismissed. July 28, 2014 (Jaswant Singh) manoj Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners employed on contract have vested right to resist replacement by contracted man-power supplied through a service provider.
Whether state government outsourcing policy regarding employment of fire staff permits recruitment through contract on new basis.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hargurpratap Singh v. State of Punjab and OthersDistinguished¶15
(2007) 13 Supreme Court Cases 292
Dharmender Vs. State of Haryana and OthersDistinguished¶15
CWP No.3794 of 2013
Salender Kumar and Others
State of Haryana and Others
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
