The court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Government's decision to grant permanent status to work charge employees who completed 10 years of service on or before 31.12.1998 with effect from 1.1.1998, finding no irrationality in the policy.
Petition dismissed; no declaration granted regarding semi-permanent or permanent status.
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.
CW-655/06
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SB Civil Writ Petition No.655/06. Ganga Lal Gujar & Ors. Vs. State & Ors.
Date of Order : 4.5.2011
HON'BLE MR. JUSTIE AJAY RASTOGI
Mr. Pradeep Mathur for petitioners. None for respondents.
A joint petition has been filed by three petitioners primarily with the grievance that they are entitled to seek declaration from this court to semi permanent/ permanent status immediately on completion of 2 and 10 years of service in terms of Rule 3(2) and Rule 3(3) of the Work Charged Employees Rules, 1964.
It has been alleged in the writ petition that all the three petitioners joined service on daily wages basis in the work charge cadre on 1.4.1976, 1.7.1982 and 21.12.1987 respectively and on completion of their two years satisfactory service they were entitled to get semi-permanent status in pursuance of Rule 3(3) of the Rules of 1964 but the question arose before the Government to grant permanent status to such employees who were working for 10 years in the work charged cadre. The Government took a policy decision dated 4th March, 1998 (Annex.4) that all such employees who
CW-655/06
2
completed 10 years of satisfactory service on or before December, 1997 shall be considered for grant of permanent status in work charge cadre with effect from 1.1.1998 and it is not the petitioner alone but in all 57 work charge employees working on various posts in the work charge cadre were declared and granted permanent status by the Government by order dated 17.5.04 with effect from 1.1.1998.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners were to be declared permanent on completion of 10 years service and the decision taken by the Government to grant them permanent status from 1.1.98 is wholly arbitrary and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.
It is evident from the record that the Government took a policy decision to grant permanent status to all such employees who completed 10 years of satisfcatory service on or before December, 1997 for grant of permanent status from 1.1.98 vide order dated 4th of March, 1998 and the policy decision of the Government is not under challenge before the court and if in terms of the policy decision the State Government has granted permanent status to all work charged employeed who completed 10 years of
CW-655/06 3
service on or before 31.12.97 to grant them permanent status with effect from 1.1.98, there appears to be no irrationality in the decision making process of the respondents which require interference by this court.
Consequently, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed.
MRG.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the State Government's policy decision to grant permanent status to work charge employees with effective date from 1.1.1998 was arbitrary.
Whether this court is required to interfere with the Government's reasoned policy decision regarding employee declarations.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ganga Lal Gujar
State
AJAY RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
