Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 567 (ALL)

REGIONAL DIRECTOR, CENTRAL REGION v. ARVIND KUMAR

2003-03-13

M.KATJU, PRAKASH KRISHNA

body2003
PRAKASH KRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) WRIT Petition No. 4911 of 2002 arise out of orders dated 6. 9. 2000 and 9. 7. 2000 (Annexures-1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in O. A. No. 137 of 1993 ; whereas Writ Petition No. 4912 of 2002 arises out of orders dated 6. 11. 2000 and 21. 8. 2001 (Annexures-1 and 2 respectively to this writ petition) passed by the Tribunal in O. A. No. 779 of 1992. ( 2 ) THE respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in Writ Petition No. 4911 of 2002 approached the Tribunal against the termination order dated 20. 5. 1992. These two respondents along with one Bachchan yadav (respondent No. 1 in Writ Petition No. 4912 of 2002) were appointed as Assistant instructors by the appointment letters dated 24/25. 2. 1992 and their termination order is dated 20. 5. 1992. At this stage, it is also relevant to state here that Sri Bachchan Yadav had also filed o. A. No. 779 of 1992 which was allowed for the reasons given in O. A. No. 137 of 1993. Besides arvind Kumar and Km. Madhuri Gupta (respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in Writ Petition No. 4911 of 2002) and Bachchan Yadav (respondent No. 1 in Writ Petition No. 4912 of 2002), one Kamrul hasan was also appointed as Assistant Instructor. Sri Kamrul Hasan was initially working as chowkidar before his appointment as Assistant Instructor. However, in the case of Kamrul hasan, he was reverted to the post of Chowkidar by the order dated 20. 5. 1992. Sri Karnrul hasan filed O. A. No. 751 of 1992, which was allowed by the Tribunal by the order dated 9. 2. 1993. The special leave petition against the said order has been dismissed by the Supreme court by judgment dated 18. 1. 1995. ( 3 ) WHEN the aforesaid two O. As. , one filed by Arvind Kumar and Km. Madhuri Gupta, being o. A. No. 137 of 1993 and O. A. No. 779 of 1992, filed by Bachchan Yadav came up for hearing before the Tribunal, the Tribunal followed the judgment given in the case of Kamrul Hasan and allowed the claims of Arvind Kumar, Km. Madhuri Gupta and Bachchan Yadav in O. A. No. 137 and O. A. No. 779. Madhuri Gupta and Bachchan Yadav in O. A. No. 137 and O. A. No. 779. ( 4 ) THE petitioners filed review application in the aforesaid two O. As. before the Tribunal on the allegation that the case of Kamrul Hasan stands on a different footing than the cases of Arvind kumar, Km. Madhuri Gupta and Bachchan Yadav. The said review applications were dismissed and the orders passed therein are also impugned in the present writ petition. ( 5 ) IN this background, we have to examine as to whether the present controversy is covered by the order of the Tribunal in the case of Kamrul Hasan. The relevant portion of the appointment letter of the aforesaid three respondents is quoted below : "the post is purely temporary under plan scheme and is likely to continue on year to year basis and liable to be terminated at any time without notice and without any reason being assigned. The appointment will be subject to the production of certificate of medical fitness from the civil surgeon of the district concerned and verification of his character and antecedents as per rule. " According to the petitioners this was purely temporary appointment and within a short span of time the services of the aforesaid three employees were terminated in terms of aforementioned appointment letters and no reasons were required to be assigned. ( 6 ) IT is relevant to state here that by the order dated 20. 5. 1992 the services of the aforesaid three respondents, namely, Arvind Kumari, Madhuri Gupta and Bachchan Yadav were terminated within a period of three month from the date of their appointment. However, in the case of kamrul Hasan, a reversion order was passed. By the said reversion order, Kamrul Hasan was reverted to the post of chowkidar. Kamrul Hasan challenged the said reversion order in O. A. No. 751 of 1992 which was allowed on the short point that in the case of direct appointment, the person cannot be normally reverted to the post below the one he has been appointed. The appointment of Kamrul Hasan on the post of Assistant Instructor was direct recruitment and on that basis, his claim was accepted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal went to the extent that an ex cadre post be created for Kamrul Hasan. The appointment of Kamrul Hasan on the post of Assistant Instructor was direct recruitment and on that basis, his claim was accepted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal went to the extent that an ex cadre post be created for Kamrul Hasan. ( 7 ) WE are of the opinion that the case of Kamrul Hasan has no parity with the cases of other assistant Instructors who are respondents in these two writ petitions. The relevant extract of the termination order is quoted below : "in reference to this Office Memorandum No. DC (H)/cr/2 (3)/92-5024, 25, 27 all dated 24th february, 1992, one month notice is hereby served to Km. Madhuri Gupta, and S/shri Bachchan yadav and Arvind Kumar the Assistant Instructors posted at Hand Block Printing Training centre (s) at Chinhut, Varanasi and Almorah respectively that their services stand terminated after one month to be counted from the date of issue of this notice to them. " The aforequoted termination order is pure and simple one and it does not cast any stigma and was passed within a short span of time immediately after the appointment. The case of the petitioners before the Tribunal was that there was no vacancy available at the time of selection of these persons as there was no sanctioned post. It has been stated that there were 20 Hand Block printing and Engraving Training Centres all over India. The Ministry of Finance, Department of expenditure have taken a decision to close down all the Departmental Training Centres in all crafts other than carpet scheme and instructions to that effect have been issued vide letter dated 27th April, 2001, calling upon the Regional Director, Central Region Handicrafts, Lucknow to identify the Departmental Training Centres. The relevant documents have been filed along with the writ petition to show that Hand Block Training Centre, Varanasi, has also been approved for closure with effect from 30. 6. 2001. In view of these facts, the reinstatement of the respondents cannot be ordered and no useful purpose will be served by remanding the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration since the appointments of the contesting respondents were made beyond the sanctioned strength and no posts were available for them. These persons would not acquire any right to hold the post. In view of these facts, the reinstatement of the respondents cannot be ordered and no useful purpose will be served by remanding the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration since the appointments of the contesting respondents were made beyond the sanctioned strength and no posts were available for them. These persons would not acquire any right to hold the post. When the above writ petitions were filed, the operation of the impugned orders were stayed by this Court by an order dated 1st February, 2002, passed in both the above writ petitions. ( 8 ) IN view of the aforesaid discussion, both the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders dated 6. 9. 2000 and 9. 7. 2001 passed in O. A. No. 137 of 1993 and the orders dated 6. 11. 2000 and 21. 8. 2001 passed in O. A. No. 779 of 1992 are quashed and both the original applications are dismissed accordingly. No order as to costs. .