IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.4117 of 2011 Date of Decision : March 08, 2011. Sukhdev Singh and others .....Petitioners versus The State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.R.K.Arora, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion to respondent No.1. Ms.Monica Chhibber Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on its behalf. Let a copy of this writ petition be handed over to her during the course of day. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass neither there is any necessity to issue notice to respondent No.2 nor any counter reply from respondent No.1 is needed. The petitioners seek a mandamus to direct the respondents to consider their claim for regularization of their services as they are working on work-charge basis on different Class-III posts in the Punjab Mandi C.W.P.No .4117 of 2011 2 Board since the years 1981-89 onwards. The above stated claim has been sought in terms of the Government of Punjab Instructions dated 28.5.1997 and 31.3.1999 (Annexures P-1 & P-2, respectively) as well as the subsequent Instructions dated 15.12.2006 (Annexure P-8). The record reveals that the petitioners were initially appointed as Class-IV employees on work-charge basis and they were further promoted to Class-III posts as per the details given in para No.3 of the writ petition. Each of the petitioner has rendered not less than 22-30 years of service. The petitioners are still awaiting to acquire the status of regular employees of the Board even though the Government of Punjab has meanwhile issued several policy decisions for regularization of services of the adhoc/work-charge/contractual employees. It further appears that the Punjab Mandi Board vide its memo dated 16.2.2010 (Annexure P-7) has requested the Government of Punjab to accord sanction to create 626 posts of different categories as a personal measure so that the services of the work-charge/daily wages employees including the petitioners can be regularized. The aforesaid letter suggests that no additional expenditure shall be incurred by respondent No.2-Board in case of sanction of the aforesaid posts. The letter reads as follows:- “.....In view of continuation of development works in Punjab Mandi Board and for completing the development works assigned by the Government from time to time in stipulated period, the staff at lower level is required. Due to long continuous services (18-20 years) of such employees and continuation of work, C.W.P.No .4117 of 2011 3 their services cannot be dispensed with. Apart from above, about 48.00 lacs have to be deposited with E.P.F. Commissioner every month on account of their EPF. If the services of such employees are regularized against the vacancies of personal measure, then the Mandi Board will not have to suffer above financial burden. As and when any of the post will fall vacant, the same will be treated as abolished. It is, therefore, requested to accord approval to the proposal sent vide this office letter No.O.A.3A/10072 dated 22.9.2009 for grant of sanction of 626 posts of different categories, as a personal measure.” No decision by the Government of Punjab has been taken on the aforesaid letter/memo of the Mandi Board so far, prompting the petitioner to approach this Court. Having heard learned counsel and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition and also keeping in view the fact that the petitioners have rendered more than 22-30 years of service as work-charge employees and it appears that they possess the requisite qualifications, the denial of regularization of their services at this stage when they are nearing retirement, might turn out to be arbitrary, discriminatory and inequitable moreso when the appointing authority-Punjab Mandi Board, is willing to regularize their services subject to the sanctioning of posts by the State Government. It is further evident from the recommendations by the Punjab Mandi Board that no additional expenditure shall be incurred in the event of sanctioning of the posts. That apart, the decision of the respondent- Board for regularization of the petitioners' services would be in C.W.P.No .4117 of 2011 4 consonance with the Government Policies, referred to above, in terms whereof the services of the work-charge employees have been regularized from time to time. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances referred to above, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the State of Punjab to take an appropriate decision on the recommendations received from the Punjab Mandi Board dated 16.2.2010 (Annexure P-7) within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. It is further directed that in case the State Government accord the sanction for regularization of the services of the work-charge employees, the respondent-Board shall consider the petitioners' claim within a period of three months after receiving such sanction. While considering the above stated claim of the petitioners, the respondents shall keep in view the directions issued by this Court in C.W.P.No.2204 of 2010 (Prem Singh and another versus State of Punjab and others), decided on 14.10.2010 (Annexure P-10). Ordered accordingly. Let a copy of this order be given dasti to Ms.Monica Chhibber Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for information and necessary compliance. March 08, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE