Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard a batch of civil appeals arising from Special Leave Petitions filed by the Inspector General of Registration, Uttar Pradesh and another against Avdesh Kumar and others. The dispute concerned daily-wage Registration Clerks in the Registration Department of the Office of the Sub-Registrars in Uttar Pradesh. Various High Court orders had directed the State either to continue the respondents till regular selections were made or to give them appointment till regular selections and to pay salary attached to those posts. The respondents were appointed on daily wage basis. The Supreme Court noted that the controversy was no longer res integra and referred to its earlier decision in Khagesh Kumar & Ors. v. Inspector General of Registration [1995 Supp (4) SCC 182], where a two-judge bench had issued detailed directions. Those directions included regularisation of daily-wage clerks appointed before 1.10.1986 under Rule 4 of Regularisation Rules subject to three years continuous service, with actual period worked and Paragraph 101 Manual duties counted; opportunity for regular appointment with age relaxation; weightage for experience by the Subordinate Services Selection Commission; and payment of emoluments for apprentice work under Paragraph 101 on representation. In the present case, some respondents were appointed after 1.10.1986 and sought the same directions. The Court held that all persons appointed either prior to or subsequent to that date would continue on ad hoc basis till regular selections were made in light of the Khagesh Kumar directions, and the same directions would operate for payment of daily wages pending regular selections. The Court also directed that overaged candidates working or having worked on daily wages would be suitably relaxed in age by the Selection Committee and considered along with all eligible candidates; if selected on merit according to rules, they would be appointed. The appeals were allowed, and no costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Regularisation of Daily-Wage Employees - Rule 4 of Regularisation Rules and Paragraph 101 of Manual - Daily-wage Registration Clerks appointed prior to 1.10.1986 eligible for regularisation if they fulfil Rule 4(1)(ii) and completed three years continuous service, computed from actual days worked including duties under Paragraph 101. Held that the controversy was no longer res integra and Khagesh Kumar directions applied (Para 1). B) Service Law - Age Relaxation and Opportunity for Regular Appointment - Rule 4 of Regularisation Rules - Daily-wage Registration Clerks to be given one opportunity of consideration for regular appointment with relaxation in age requirement under the Rules. Held that overaged candidates would be suitably relaxed in age by the Selection Committee and considered with eligible candidates (Para 1). C) Service Law - Experience Weightage in Selection - Directions to Subordinate Services Selection Commission - Selection Commission while making regular appointments to Registration Clerk posts to give weightage to daily-wage experience and frame guidelines. Held that this direction applied equally to all daily-wage clerks whether appointed before or after 1.10.1986 (Para 1). D) Service Law - Payment of Emoluments for Apprentice Work - Paragraph 101 of Manual - Daily-wage employee who performed Registration Clerk duties as apprentice under Paragraph 101 could submit representation within three months and authority to verify and pay daily-wage emoluments. Held that such payment should be made within three months of representation (Para 1). E) Service Law - Interim Continuation Ad Hoc - Khagesh Kumar Directions - All persons appointed either prior to or subsequent to 1.10.1986 would continue on ad hoc basis till regular selections and same directions operate for daily wages pending regular selections. Held that appeals allowed with directions and no costs (Para 1).
Issue of Consideration
Whether daily-wage Registration Clerks appointed before and after 1.10.1986 were entitled to continuation ad hoc, regularisation, age relaxation and daily wages in terms of Khagesh Kumar directions; whether overaged candidates should be given age relaxation during regular selection.
Final Decision
The appeals are allowed. All persons appointed either prior to or subsequent to 1.10.1986 would continue on ad hoc basis till regular selections were made in light of Khagesh Kumar directions; same directions operate for payment of daily wages pending regular selections. Overaged candidates would be suitably relaxed in age by Selection Committee and considered with all eligible candidates; if selected on merit according to rules, they would be appointed. No costs.
Law Points
- Daily-wage Registration Clerks prior to 1.10.1986 eligible for regularisation under Rule 4 of Regularisation Rules if completed three years continuous service
- actual days worked including duties under Paragraph 101 of Manual counted for three-year service
- regular appointment opportunity with age relaxation to daily-wage clerks
- Selection Commission to give experience weightage
- apprentice duties under Para 101 entitle daily-wage emoluments on representation
- all daily-wage appointees continue ad hoc until regular selections
- overaged candidates get age relaxation by Selection Committee
- selected candidates appointed on merit.
