AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S. Datta Purkayastha, J
Heard Ms. R. Purkayastha, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
Ms. Purkayastha, learned counsel submits that the applicant was engaged as Field Operator in 2010 for a tenure based term of 4 years, and till date, he is working in the same post. His last engagement letter was issued on 10.02.2022 for the period w.e.f. 10.02.2022 to 02.02.2025. Learned counsel further submits that despite discharging his duties to the satisfaction of the authority for such a long period, he has been deprived of regularisation and even he was not paid the minimum of the pay scale meant for Field Operator. Learned counsel further submits that in the engagement letter it was specified that the tenure of engagement will come to an end on his attaining 50 years of age.
According to Ms. Purkayastha, this condition has ignited grievances to all the workers employed under identical conditions along with the applicant throughout the country and matter is under consideration of the Department itself. But no final decision has yet been taken. Learned counsel also submits that unless stay is granted in respect of the operation of this condition and his tenure is allowed to expire on 02.02.2025, he will be terminated from the job and the very purpose of the writ petition will be frustrated.
Mr. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel, on the other hand, submits that they did not get sufficient scope to submit any written objection against the said petition as only on 28.01.2025 they received the copy of the stay petition and more so, in case the engagement of the applicant is terminated w.e.f. from 02.02.2025, and thereafter, he get the reliefs from the Court, he will be entitled to fresh engagement in the organisation with all the arrear dues and therefore, he will not be prejudiced in anyway.
Considered the rival submissions.
As it appears the engagement letter was issued on 10.02.2022 but at that time the applicant did not raise any grievance against the same and only when his term of engagement is going to be expired, he has approached this Court for such interim relief. Moreover, nothing prima-facie could be shown by the applicant’s side to claim any such extension beyond the period of 50 years as a matter of right under any Rules/Regulations/Decisions of the corporation.
Considering all these matter the petition is hereby rejected being devoid of any merit.
Interlocutory application, is accordingly, disposed of.