AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Amareshwar Sahay, J.—Learned Counsel for the petitioners is permitted to add the Chief Engineer, P.H.E.D. Department as party-respondent in this writ petition.
These four writ petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to regularize their services on permanent basis on the ground that they are working on work-charge basis as Grade-IV employees in the P.H.E.D. Department at Khunti since 1989. They further claim for regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. Further prayer is that the salary since March, 2001, which has not been paid to them, be directed to be paid immediately.
The brief facts, which are not in dispute, are:
That pursuant to the advertisement published on 25.8.1987 (Annexure-1) for appointment to the post of Class-IV to be posted in the District of Ranchi, these writ petitioners applied for such appointment. Subsequently, a District panel was prepared and published by District Nazarat, in which, the name of these four petitioners were also included. Subsequently, the petitioners were issued a letter of appointment as contained in Annexure-4 to this writ petition on 22.8.1989, on the basis of which, an office order was issued on 16.7.1990 appointing the petitioners on work-charge basis on the post of Khalasi in the Pay scale of Rs. 775-12-955-14-1025/- in the Department of Public Health Engineering at Khunti. The petitioners joined their respective posts. The grievance of the petitioner are that though they are continuously working on the post of Khalasi on work-charge basis, but, till date, they have not been absorbed on permanent basis, though, a person namely Mohit Mahto, who was appointed along with the petitioners, has been appointed on permanent basis. The petitioners also claimed that in spite of the fact that they have filed several representations for their absorption on permanent basis, but no order on their representation has been passed by any of the concerned authorities.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State-respondent. The facts stated hereinabove have not been disputed in the counter affidavit rather in paragraph 22 thereof, it has been stated that the Superintending Engineer vide his letter No. 541 dated 14.7.2001 has sent the name of the work-charge establishment employees for regularization of the services, to the Chief Engineer, but no decision has been taken as yet and the name of the petitioners appear in the said list. A copy of the letter dated 14.7.2001 has been annexed as Annexure-R-4/''E'' to the counter affidavit.
Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners relying on the Full Bench decision of this Court in case of Ram Prasad Singh and Another and Others Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others, , submitted that the Full Bench held that the work-charge employees, who have completed more than five years of continuous service against a post in the work-charge establishment, and otherwise eligible, have a right of consideration of their cases for taking over their services in the permanent (regular) establishment, irrespective of the date of their appointment.
In view of the decision of the Full Bench, I find that, the petitioners have been able to make out a case for consideration of their cases for regular appointment. Accordingly, this application is allowed. The respondents, particularly the respondent No. 6, the Chief Engineer, P.H.E.D., are, hereby, directed to consider the case of the petitioners for their appointment/ absorption on regular basis keeping in mind the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Prasad Singh and Anr. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. supra, and take a decision in the matter as early as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order. If the petitioners have not been paid their salary for the period, then the same must be paid if they have worked, within the same time of eight weeks.