Kuldeep Singh Parihar vs Director Local Bodies Jammu And Others

Sindhu Sharma, J

This petition was filed by Late Kuldeep Singh(petitioner) seeking regularization as Khilafwarzi Inspector in notified Area Committee Ramban, on

the ground that he was appointed as Khilafwarzi Inspector on consolidated pay of Rs. 1,000/- which was subsequently increased to Rs. 2500/-,

however, on the direction of the respondent-Administrator Municipal Committee, Ramban vide order dated 04.04.2005, services of the petitioner were

terminated with effect from 04.04.2005.

Aggrieved thereof, petitioner has filed this writ petition on 11.04.2005, which was listed for the first time in this Court on 15.04.2005 but was

adjourned on the request of counsel for the petitioner. It was again listed on 02.05.2015 and notice was issued to the respondents for filing objections.

Notice in the interim application was also issued.

A perusal of the record indicates that there is no interim direction staying the operation on the order impugned. The stand of the respondents is that

the petitioner is no longer in service after his services were terminated with effect from 04.04.2005 and therefore, this petition is not maintainable.

These objections were filed on 15.02.2006, despite this, the petitioner did not file any rejoinder to the stand of the respondents that he has no longer

role in the Municipal Committee. It is unfortunate that the petitioner is died during the pendency of this writ petition and the application for bringing on

record legal representatives was filed on 17.08.2017 by his wife and two sons, who were major as per the application seeking impleadment. As per

the death certificate, the petitioner was died on 01.06.2017 and vide order dated 15.12.2017 his legal heirs were brought on record subject to all just

exceptions.

The only question involved in this writ petition is whether any right is vested on the legal heirs to continue this petition, which in fact has become

infructuous in view of the fact that at the time of death, the petitioner was not in service after 04.04.2005 as the services of the petitioner were

terminated, which in fact should have been on 02.02.2001 when the order was actually signed. Even the application for impleadment does not disclose

the right of the legal heirs to continue the petition. The right, if any, would accrue to them only if the deceased was to continue in service after

04.04.2005. It is also noticed that the petitioner has placed on record a copy of two pages of his service book, which though was not relevant because

only entry made in it is about the fixation of pay and the date of birth. Why the service book is prepared is not explained, it could only be prepared if

the regular appointment was made and not in the case of appointment made on consolidated wages.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that Late Kuldeep Singh is ceased to be an employee of the Municipal Committee, Raman with effect from

04.04.2005. The argument of the petitioner that he has not handed over the charge is misconceived as he ceases to be the employee of the Municipal

Committee. It is immaterial whether he has handed over the charge or not. Hence this petition, therefore, does not survive for determination of the

rights of the legal heirs of the deceased petitioner because the order of termination of the deceased petitioner has been given effect to as the Late

Kuldeep Singh Parihar (deceased petitioner) was not holding any designation in the Municipal Committee after 04.04.2005. This petition is therefore,

without any merit and is dismissed as such.