1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1501/95 Tara Chand Sahu vs. State & Ors. Date of order : 24/3/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Anil Jain for the petitioner. Shri Zakir Hussain, Addl. Govt. Counsel for the respondents. ****** This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer that the respondents be directed to reinstate him on the post of peon and award him consequential benefits and a further direction be given to regularise him in service. Shri Anil Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as Peon with the respondents vide order dated 14.12.1991 on consolidated wages of Rs.50/-. In this manner, he regularly worked for four years. However, when he insisted for payment of regular pay scale, his services were terminated and instead of him, one Jagdishi Bai was appointed. The petitioner filed representation on 4.7.1994, but nothing was done. Action of the respondents is arbitrary 2 and discriminatory inasmuch as violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Shri Zakir Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the writ petition and argued that the petitioner was never appointed against any sanctioned post. He was merely assigned the work of cleaning the school building and for filling up water. He use to work only for one and half hour mainly in the morning. He was thus merely a part time employee. There could be no question of his regularisation because appointment of the petitioner was never made as such against any post. He was paid a sum of Rs.50/- per month. He was never given regular appointment. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that the petitioner has not been appointed by any regular mode of recruitment inasmuch as petitioner has also failed to show that he was appointed against any clear post. When the respondents contends that he was merely given the job of cleaning the school building and filling up the water in 3 the mud pots, no direction for his reinstatement and regularisation can be issued at this distance of time especially when the period of his working was confined to only two and half years and more than fifteen years have gone by since he was last working with the respondents. This writ petition is therefore dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/