Nirmal Mehta vs PEC Centre For Consultancy In Engineering And Others

Jagmohan Bansal, J

As common issues are involved in the captioned petitions, the same are hereby disposed of by this common order. For the sake of brevity and convenience, facts are borrowed from CWP-10036-2014.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 13.03.2014 whereby he was relived from service.

The petitioner joined Punjab Engineering College Centre for Consultancy in Engineering (for short ‘PEC-CCE’) in 1993 as Lab Attendant. His appointment was sponsored by employment exchange. He carried out all the duties which were performed by regular employees. He was granted service benefits like gratuity, increment, pay scale and allowances like regular employees. He filed CWP No.10847 of 2013 before this Court seeking regularization in terms of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka and Others Versus Umadevi and Others, 2006 AIR SC 1806. During the pendency of aforesaid petition, the respondent by impugned order relieved him from service.

Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that as per judgment of Supreme Court in Umadevi (supra), the petitioner was entitled to be regularized. He completed 20 years’ service in 2013, thus, respondent was duty bound to regularize him whereas respondent relieved him on account of his request for regularization.

Heard the arguments and perused the record

From the perusal of record, it is evident that petitioner joined service in 1993. He performed all the duties which were performed by regular employees. He was paid service benefits like regular employees. He completed 10 years’ service by 2006, thus, prima facie as per judgment of Supreme Court in Umadevi (supra) was entitled to be regularized, however, came to be relieved in 2014. There is no stay in his favour. A period of 12 years from the date of his discharge has passed away. This Court relying upon judgment of Supreme Court in Umadevi (supra) or recent judgment in Jaggo Versus Union of India and Others, 2024 SCC Online SC 3826, at this belated stage cannot ask the respondent to reinstate the petitioner and thereafter regularize him.

Dismissed.

It is made clear that dismissal of instant petitions would not debar petitioners from availing remedies as permissible by law QUA other claims, if any.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.