Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF HARYANA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SURINDER KUMAR & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/03/1997
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Order dated 2.8.1996 is recalled. Special Leave
Petitions are restored.
Leave granted. These appeals by special leave arise
from the judgment of the Division Bench of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court, dated November 23, 1995 and July 28,
1995 in C.W.P. Nos. 15828/95 and 1479/95 respectively.
The admitted position is that the respondents came to
be appointed as daily wagers on contract basis to the post
of Clerk. They filed writ petition in the High Court for
their regularisation. The High Court in the impugned order
has directed payment of wages on the principle of equal pay
for equal work and also regularisation of their services.
Thus these appeals, by special leave.
The controversy is no longer res judicata. This Court
in State of Haryana v. Piara Singh [(1992) 4 SCC 118] has
laid down the guidelines for appointment by recruitment and
if need be by regularisation of class IV employees. As a
consequence, any appointment made to the service shall be in
accordance with the statutory rules and also the guidelines
laid down thereunder. Therefore, the appellant is directed
to consider their cases in accordance with law and
guidelines laid down therein for appointment of the
respondents to the service as per law provided they are
otherwise eligible. If they have become age-barred, age may
be relaxed for the period they have worked. On appointment,
from that date they will be entitled to equal pay on par
with the regular clerks.
Shri Manoj Swarup, learned counsel for the respondents,
contends that the post held by the respondents are
interchangeable and in fact they have been interchanged to
enable them to hold the posts. That contention cannot be
given acceptance for the reason that since the respondents
were appointed on contract basis on daily wages, they cannot
have any right to a post as such until they are duly
selected and appointed. Merely because they are able to
manage to have the posts interchange, they cannot become
entitled to the same pay-scale which the regular clerks are
holding by claiming that they are discharging their duties
as regular employees. The very object of selection is to
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
test the eligibility and then to make selection in
accordance with rules prescribed for recruitment. Obviously
the respondents recruitment was not made in accordance with
the rules. This Court has also pointed out in State of
Haryana & Ors. v. Jasmer Singh & Ors. [JT 1996 (10) SC 876]
in that behalf. If any illegal actions have been taken by
the officer after recruitment, it would be a grave matter of
indiscipline by the officers and the higher authorities are
directed to look into the matter and see that such actions
are rectified, but that would not be a matter for this Court
to give legitimacy to illegal acts done by the officers and
to grant relief on the basis of wrong or illegal actions of
superior officers. The appropriate authority would look into
and take suitable disciplinary action against the erring
officers and submit the report of the action taken and the
result thereof to the Registry of this Court.
The appeals are accordingly allowed and the orders of
the High Court set aside, but the directions that would be
followed are as indicated in the judgment. It is needless to
mention that they would take expeditious action in following
the directions. No costs.