Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
BISHAMBER DUTT
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23/10/1996
BENCH:
K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
These appeals by special leave arise from the order of
the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench at New
Delhi.
The admitted position is that the respondent along with
others came to be appointed on September 3, 1990, November
14, 1991 and September 14, as Class IV employees in the
office of the Controller of Defence Accounts on part-time
basis. There is a controversy as to whether they are
appointed on hourly basis or on regular basis. The admitted
position is that they were receiving the consolidated pay
of Rs. 500/- per month which was raised to Rs.600/- per
month for working six hours a day. It is not necessary to
consider the case whether it full-time or hourly basis or
monthly basis. Suffice it to state that they were not
appointed to a regular post after selection according to
rules; they were appointed as part-time employees de hors
the rules. The question, therefore, is : whether they are
entitled to the temporary status or regularisation as
directed by the Tribunal? It is seen that pursuant to the
enquiry whether temporary status should be granted to the
part-time employees, directions were issued by the Ministry
of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension dated July 12,
1994 in the Memorandum, Clause 3, that they are not entitled
to such status. Since they are not appointed on regular
basis in accordance with rules the direction issued by the
Tribunal to regularise the service is obviously illegal. It
is then contended by the learned counsel for the respondents
that in view of the fact that they were regularly working
for a long time they are entitled to regularisation. We do
not appreciate the stand taken on behalf of the
respondents. Unless they are appointed on regular basis
according to rules after consideration of the claims on
merits, there is no question of regularisation of the
services.
The appeals are accordingly allowed. The orders of the
Tribunal is set aside. No costs.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2