Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Nandkumar Rajaram Parve, was appointed as a Junior Clerk on a temporary basis with effect from 1st June 1990 in the office of the Director General of Police, Mumbai. He was sponsored by the Employment Exchange but did not go through the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (MPSC) examination. His initial appointment was for three months, but he continued in service until 9th May 1996. On 17th February 1995, the Government of Maharashtra took a policy decision to regularize temporarily appointed clerks in various government establishments in Mumbai city who were appointed between 10th January 1990 and 31st December 1992. The MPSC conducted a special competitive examination on 27th March 1995 for all such temporary appointees. The MPSC forwarded a list of 107 successful candidates for regularization, and the petitioner was among them. The State Government issued a Government Resolution (G.R.) on 9th June 1996 for regularization of these 107 clerks, and the petitioner's name was included in Schedule 'A' to the G.R. On 5th August 1996, an order was passed by the office of the Director General of Police regularizing the services of three clerks, including the petitioner. The order also stated that seniority would be determined in terms of para 2 of the G.R. dated 9th June 1996. A seniority list was published showing the petitioner at serial No. 3 with his initial date of appointment as 1st June 1990, indicating continuous service. He was also granted an annual increment of Rs. 20/- as per order dated 10th July 1997. However, on 12th August 1998, an order was issued terminating the petitioner's services on the ground that his initial appointment was not through the MPSC and that he was not covered by the G.R. dated 9th June 1996. The petitioner challenged this termination order by way of a writ petition. The court analyzed the facts and found that the petitioner was indeed covered by the G.R. dated 9th June 1996, as his name was included in Schedule 'A' and he had been regularized by the order dated 5th August 1996. The court held that the termination order was arbitrary and illegal, as the respondents could not unilaterally go back on the regularization already granted. The court allowed the petition, quashed the termination order dated 12th August 1998, and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and all consequential benefits.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Regularization of Temporary Employees - Continuous Service - The petitioner, appointed temporarily as a Junior Clerk on 1st June 1990, was regularized pursuant to a Government Resolution dated 9th June 1996 and a special examination conducted by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission. The court held that the petitioner's services were continuous from the date of initial appointment and that the subsequent termination order was invalid as it was based on a mistaken belief that the petitioner was not covered by the regularization scheme. (Paras 1-5) B) Service Law - Seniority - Initial Appointment Date - The seniority list published after regularization showed the petitioner's initial date of appointment as 1st June 1990, indicating continuous service. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to seniority from that date and that the respondents could not unilaterally alter the seniority or terminate his services without following due process. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regularization of his services and seniority from the date of his initial temporary appointment as a Junior Clerk, and whether the subsequent order terminating his services was valid.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the termination order dated 12th August 1998, and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and all consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Regularization of temporary employees
- continuous service
- seniority from initial appointment
- Maharashtra Public Service Commission special examination
- Government Resolution dated 9th June 1996
