cf-^ C^ l^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WritApoeaINo. RO? /2007 APPELLANT h^ (51?f-1 cl'''~:s" >•* -". ^af'" ^.^^' ^^^y--^ .-••:^^--- .^ •»" ^1' '^y--" '» RESPONDENTS Smt. P. Grihlaxmi Yadav W/o Shri Satya Rao Yadav, aged about 50 years R/o BUaspur near Collector Bunglow, District Bilaspur [C.G.] at present at Kaeturba Nagar, Sindhi Cplony, Bilaspur [C.G.], VERSUS S'tate of Chhattisgarh, Through - Mahila Avam Bal Vikas Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur [C.G.] <y A 2. Zila Mahila Avam Bal Vikas Adhikari, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur , [C.G.]. 3. Project Officer, DWCRA, through CoUector, BilaspurJC.G.]. ^t^^ rS^H^^^C^^y^W^ ^ f^J 60^ 3 A" ^0^ WRIT APPEAL UNDER RULE 157(10^1)? "THE HIGH -/'' s^ COURT OF CHHATTISGARH RULES. 2005. HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BtLASPUR Dl¥iston_&ench:Hon'fate Shri Justice I.KI. Quckiusi Hon'bteShElJysyce Prashant Kumar Mishra. Wrlt ARpeal No.207 ^2007 Smt. P. Grihlaxmi Yadav Versys '" , State of Chhattisgarh & others. Smt. Meena Shastri, counsel for the^ippellant. Shri Ajft Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. {Aj3peai to Division Bencht Act, 2006 & Writ Aopeal under &rie 157 nOidMat of the Hiah Court of Chhattisaa'rh. Rules. 2005 [12.04.28K Thte writ appeat has been fsted against the impugned ordeE dated 16-06-2006 passed iipin^k In \A.^ P Is.lin' i"ui''««'w ik» '»B .» . i it^F. >ytne appeilart has fited OrigiRal Applscation before the M.P. Stete Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur reg',stere< 13976/2003. Instially the as O.A. No. 2^7/1999 whteh was transferred to Hlgh Court and converted asW.P. No. 13976/2003. (2) The brief facts of the case are that the writ appsllant v/as appointed as 'Aaya' on foced monthly wage basis on 29-11-1991. However, vide order dated 16-08-1993 hsr ser»"ces were ctiscortinued, she went to the Labour Court and vide order dated 13- 12-1996 the respondents were dirscted to take ths 'ATit appeliant back IR service 'A'ith back wages and the ^me vras complied 'jwth. Vide order dfited 03-04-1997 relnstatiro her back in service with ^^s^l* ^ }!1 ti^^' -A- back wages, she was posted vide order dated 06-05-1997. ThereafSer on 27^ March 19®a circuter was Issued to reduce the strength of the emptoyees by issusng direction that the persons who are appointed in excess of sancttoned pcst should be teiTRinated. Thereafter ths order of termination of $he wcft appeliant's servicss wsre passed against which she ftied Origsnal No.2267/1999 which was transferred to this High Court registered of the respondents before the that the appolRtment of the writ W.P. No. 13976/2003 as already indfcated above. (3) In the retum filed on behalf teamed Single Judgs it was started appellant vras not against the r^ular vacant post and she vras not working on a regular sanct'soned post. (4) She was not appointed and posted as a reguter empioyee but she was appointed for a period of 89 days temporarily based OR monthiy rste fb<ed by *he Coltector as 'Aaya'. (5) The teamed Singte Judge has held that the writ appellant had no rigbt to continue in her status. in the judgment of Constitution Sench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Sscretary, State of Kamatalca and Qthers Vs. Umadevi (3) and others reported in (2006)4 SCC 1 Hon'ble Apex Court held that: "......... # is ctear ttaf acfcerencs to fte fufe of sqiiaiity in fxibSc emptoynwnt is a basic feafare of ow ConsffttiSon and since ttw mls of !aw is te core of ow ConsWuSon, a court would certainly be disabled fmm passing an oreter uf^mleSng a woiaSon o1 Artfcte 14 w sn orctering ifte o\iertoQiwrg of <te n6ed to cxsmply wiQi Ss Fequiiements of Aiticte 14 mad with Aftscte 16 of fts Consfitufcn. rherefo?®, consfetert wdf? th®scheme of pubSc empfoynwnt, thss Court white laying etown (?»tew, !-; •.•-....^••y hss neeessarity to ftoW ftaf untess ffw apfiointment ss h temis crf fts refevsnt n^ss and aftsr s pmper coinpeSSon anmng quaiiSed fseraons (ft®sams wwMt nct confer any nght on (fte appwiitee. tf st is a contracfual appointment, ffre appoinimen( comes to an end at fte sref of fte contract, if it wem an engaywnent or appe»ntrnenton daity wages or casuaf basis, the sams would^omg to an aivl when it is eRssonKniiect. Stmilariy, a tempesary emftoyee could not claim te be rtiyte /^nnanert on e expcy of hfs tenn of appointmwi/t H has also to b®cfarffiecf S%t *ner®fy &ecause a tsmparary emptoyee or a casual wage worker !s conffnued for a tfn®beyond ffw term of Ais appoin&nent h9 wcvld nat be enSSied to tae absortsd in regular servise w macte pwmawnt, merely on S"e strengffit w such coniintsnce, if ee or®!'na(ap,ooin<n»ntwas not made fcy foSbmng a due praesss of sefecffon as aivisaged 6y (he islevant rofes. tt is ncst cspen te (hs cowt te prevsrt r^ulsr lecwitofent at ffise mstence af temsotasy amptoyoas wftoss periad of emptoyn nt has come to an snd or of ad hoc ®mpfo)®eswho fay tfie yery nattc®of tfieir appomtmenfc eto not acQiiire any lyht. The High Couife acii?®ufKter Afficfe 226 of tf» Constiftriion, shoiM not orc&'isriiy issi« diivcSons for absorptton, regyferizafeton, or pefmai^nt CQnSnuancs wstoss ft®iaciu msnt itseSf was maefe regulafty and m tefms of ffiie conststi/Sonat scheme. Mefety because an emydoy^ had conSntied omfer cover of an orefer ofan oreter of fte courf, wteh w®have cfescribed as 'liiigious emptoymenf in the earifer part of (fte judsnwnt, he wouid not be entMed fo any i^ht to be abso.'fced or maefe permwsent in the servioe. In fact, in such cases, ffite High C-ourt may rvst fcejustifed in issuiiy .'nterim direclfons, since after all, if uftiroatefy tts smpto^e appmacHng it ss found en®tedto relief. ft may be poss&fe for if te moufd ff»ereltef in such a manner fta( uffimate/y na prejixfce wiff be caused te him. ' 45. Wijte eSiwcttng iat appewhuQnts, tempo/sry or casuat, be regufensed or made permanent, e couris ara 4- sisff'^r ifte I-K iyed by the Sv for some Sffie ,'n for a of time. St 's n-'st as 'f tfre who an or ,<n "atore, is no* awafa of the of his sfnstoyment. He Sw it bs he ls nat in a to - nat at - he fnsght for so"w so as to ouf his he But on i't .*x?t1» the to »» v'eu/ a wfw has or got empfo^d be to be conSnu^ permarsntly." ^ns&^j! ^f 1H& %^nv.fS %S?& ^%Vj 'f^Sf tt i 'Tilri'S'* 'tnFi ^t i-'B* ^lfcj°%/1?\? 'if'^Q 3 SSlii^ iltHfi H^ ^nl^fl flrfSUH?i fof •\Ai 9\A ftS\/ ;wtV'\f-'^t %4t ^Uii t^» s'./ii by the Judge. Accordingly, the v."t is Sd;- .M.Quddusi Judge ^l»gg-g:. 'Q^^-SiS^"^ Sd/- prashantKumarMishra Judge