Om Prakash Singh vs State of Bihar and Others

R.S. Garg, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Under Annexure-1 dated 4th June 1982 the Petitioner was appointed as a contingency employee with effect from 1.5.1982 on daily wages of Rs. 10/-. Thereafter, according to the Petitioner he was regularized on 1.10.1984 and was given regular appointment with effect from 31.7.1991. The Petitioner says and submits that another man Ashok Kumar Jha was also given contingency appointment under letter No. 309 dated 2.11.1982 on daily wages of Rs. 10/- for the period between 21.9.1982 to 28.3.1983 and as the said Ashok Kumar Jha has been given regular appointment prior to the Petitioner''s appointment the present is a case of discrimination and the Petitioner is entitled to restoration of his seniority qua Ashok Kumar Jha and he has also entitled to the benefits.

From the records it appears that the Petitioners so also the said Ashok Kumar Jha were appointed as contingency employees on daily wages. Undisputedly, in cases of contingency employees neither the seniority is maintained nor the seniority list is maintained. The Petitioner had secured the appointment after pleasing the concerned Minister and could secure a regular appointment. In a case like present even if the Petitioner has been given regular appointment with effect from 21.7.1991 he must thank his stars because in these days of tough competition he continued in service under protection of a Minister and thereafter could secure a permanent appointment. Even otherwise the regular appointment would be made of a particular person not only on the basis of continued the service but would be given to (sic)m on the strength of the work done by him and the total assessment of the employee. Barring filing of Annexure-3 the Petitioner has not brought anything on the record to show that for what particular reasons these two persons were considered separately.

I find no reason to interfere in the matter. The petition is dismissed.