Harish Kumar And Others vs Government Of India And Others

Raj Vir Sharma, J

Brief facts of the applicants' case, as projected in the O.A., are that they were engaged by the respondent-Department as Compilers/Data Entry Operators in August 2009. Subsequently, they were informed by the respondent-Department that they were duly appointed to the post of Compiler/Data Entry Operator. They were also required by the respondent-Department to mark their attendance in the Attendance Register, and were also paid salaries by the respondent-Department. While continuing to work as Compilers/Data Entry Operators in the office of respondent no.3, in the month of December 2012 they were informed by the respondent-Department that they were on contract basis on consolidated salary and their services were terminated. The respondent-Department also did not pay their salary for the month of December 2012. Therefore, they made representations dated 23.5.2016 requesting the respondent-Department to allow them to continue as Data Entry Operators in the office of respondent No.3, as there was no complaint against them and their work was satisfactory. There being no response, the applicant filed the present O.A. on 24.8.2016 seeking the following reliefs:

"A) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the representation of the Petitioners and grant them employment according to their qualifications for the post of a compiler or any other suitable post that the Respondents consider fit under the facts and circumstances of the petitioners' case.

B) Any other relief that this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Resisting the O.A., the respondents have filed a counter reply. They have stated, inter alia, that the applicants were engaged by the service provider, namely, M/s Park Management Support Services (P) Ltd., to do data entry work in the office of respondent no.3. The applicants were never appointed or engaged by the respondents to work as Compilers/Data Entry Operators. Therefore, question of termination of services of the applicants from December 2012 and payment of any wages/salary to them for the month of December 2012 by the respondent-Department did not arise. In view of the above, the respondents pray for dismissal of the O.A.

No rejoinder reply has been filed by the applicants refuting the stand taken by the respondents.

I have heard Mr.Lalit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, and Ms.Sumedha Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

Mr.Lalit Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the applicants invited my attention to the photocopies of the Attendance Register for the months of November and December 2011 and January to April 2012(enclosed as Annexure P/3 to the O.A.) and a cheque dated 21.4.2014 for Rs.92,822/- on SBI, Noida, drawn by the Pay & Accounts Officer, Customs, Central Excise & Service, Noida, in favour of applicant-Harish Kumar, and submitted that the above Attendance Register and payment of salaries to one of the applicants clearly go to show that the applicants were the employees of the respondent-Department, and, therefore, the termination of their services is wholly arbitrary and illegal, and the respondent-Department should be directed to provide them employment according to their qualifications.

Per contra, Ms.Sumedha Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, submitted that since the service provider engaged the applicants to do the data entry work in the office of respondent no.3, the maintenance of Attendance Register was required by the service provider for the purpose of making payment of wages to the applicants, and such maintenance of Attendance Register does not clothe the applicants with a right to claim that they were employees of the respondent-Department. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement entered into by and between the respondent-Department and the service provider, the payment of wages made by the respondent-Department directly to the applicants does not imply that the applicants were employees of the respondent-Department.

After having given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions, I have found no substance in the contentions of the applicants.

The applicants have not produced before this Tribunal any tangible material showing that they were duly appointed to the post of Compiler/Data Entry Operator by the respondent-Department in August 2009 and were working as Compilers/Data Entry Operators in the respondent-Department. No material has also been placed before this Tribunal to show that the applicants were engaged by the respondent-Department to work on contract basis with consolidated salary and their services were terminated by the respondent-Department. From the documents filed by the applicants, along with their O.A., it is clear that the respondent-Department had outsourced the work of data entry work, and the applicants were engaged by M/s Park Management Support Services Pvt.Ltd. to do the data entry work in the office of respondent no.3. Specific amount of expenditure was sanctioned by the respondent-Department for such data entry work and paid from the head "Office Expenses". Thus, the applicants were disengaged by the said service provider in accordance with the terms and conditions of their engagement. Therefore, I do not find any substance in the claim made by the applicants in the present O.A.

Resultantly, the O.A., being devoid of merit, is dismissed. No costs.