IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.M. No. 130-C of 2009 In RSA No. 37 of 2009 Date of decision: 22.1.2009 Municipal Council, Jind … Appellant. Versus. Bhagirath and others … Respondents. THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate, for the appellant. … ARVIND KUMAR, J: For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay of 118 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. RSA No. 37 of 2009: The present appellant was the defendant in the suit for declaration preferred by plaintiff, Bhagirath. Plaintiff in his suit pleaded that he was appointed as Pump Operator on daily-wage basis in June, 1980. He having worked as such till 14.6.1987, was entitled to be regularized on the said post of Pump Operator but defendant No.2 regularized him on the post of Beldar. Thus, plaintiff claimed regularization against the post of Pump Operator and further sought direction to the defendants to calculate and pay him arrears of the post of Pump Operator along with interest. Upon notice of the suit, defendants 1, 2 and 4 did not put in appearance despite service and were accordingly proceeded against ex-parte. Defendant No.3 (appellant herein) contested the suit and filed written statement, stating that the plaintiff does not fulfill the requisite qualification of Pump Operator which is Matriculation with Pump Operating licence or Matriculation with diploma from I.T.I.. RSA No. 37 of 2009 -2- Both the Courts below on appreciation of evidence adduced by the parties, have decreed the suit of the plaintiff holding that the plaintiff-respondent had worked on the post of Pump Operator for sufficiently long period, i.e. for about 11 years and therefore, non- possessing of requisite qualification, as claimed by the defendants, is no bar to regularize the plaintiff on the post of Pump Operator, particularly when in similar circumstances, defendant No.2 vide orders, Exhibits P- 14 and P-15 regularised two other employees, namely, Banarsi Dass and Ishwar, out of whom Banarsi Dass was simply matriculate while Ishwar had no educational qualification or licence in regard to Pump Operator. For coming to this conclusion, the Courts below placed reliance upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhagwati Prasad v. Delhi State Mineral Development Corporation, 1990(1) RSJ-255, wherein it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the initial minimum educational qualification prescribed for different posts is undoubtedly a factor to be reckoned with, which is so at the time of initial entry into service but once the appointments were made as daily workers and they were allowed to work for a considerable length of time, it would be hard and to deny them the confirmation in the respective posts on the ground that they lack the prescribed educational qualifications. Nothing has been shown that the findings of fact so recorded by the Courts below suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to the record. No question of law, muchless substantial, arises in the present appeal. Consequently, the appeal being without any merit is hereby dismissed. January 22, 2009 ( ARVIND KUMAR) JS JUDGE