IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 7/2008 (TA-2/2003). Reserved on : 03.06.2009. Date of Decision: 19.06.2009. Ravinder Singh Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and Others. Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting5? Yes. For the petitioner : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. For the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General. For respondent Nos. 3 and 4 : Mr. Yogesh K. Chandel, Advocate, vice Mr. R.D. Kaundal, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) The petitioner alongwith other candidates was interviewed for the post of Part Time Water Carrier by the duly constituted Selection Committee on 16th July, 2002. His name was duly recommended by the Selection Committee vide a letter dated 25th July, 2002 for appointment as Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Andheri. However, the respondent Nos. Whether the reporters of Local Papers are allowed to see the Judgment?yes. : 2 : 3 and 4 did not issue the necessary appointment order enabling the petitioner to join his duties as Part Time Water Carrier. He also started working as Part Time Water Carrier w.e.f. 3.8.2002, as is evident from Annexure P-9 issued by the Centre Head Teacher on 22.10.2002. However, the petitioner was permitted to join his duties formally in the year, 2004. Mr. Bimal Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the action of respondents No. 3 and 4 not permitting the petitioner to join his duties pursuant to his selection as Part Time Water Carrier was arbitrary. He finally contended that the petitioner is entitled to the salary w.e.f. 3.8.2002 till the date of his joining in Government Primary School, Andheri formally. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner can not be granted salary w.e.f. 3.8.2002 since he has joined his duties only in the year, 2004. The respondents No. 3 and 4 have not chosen to file any reply. Mr. Yogesh Chandel has adopted the argument advanced by Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Senior Additional Advocate General. I have heard the parties and perused the record carefully. : 3 : What emerges from the pleadings of the parties is that the petitioner’s name was recommended for the post of Part Time Water Carrier by the Selection Committee on 25th July, 2002. The procedure for appointment to the post of Part Time Water Carrier is governed under Notification issued on 27th July, 2001. The appointing authority is the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner is to be treated as contractual employee of the Gram Panchayat as per Clause 18 of this Notification. The Block Primary Education Officer has sent the recommendations dated 25th July, 2002 to the respondent No. 4. Petitioner made a representation to her on 31st July, 2002 to issue necessary appointment letter. He also made a representation to the Deputy Commissioner, District Sirmaur on 1st August, 2002. The District Panchayat Officer vide a letter dated 1st August, 2002 directed the respondent No. 4 to issue necessary appointment letter enabling the petitioner to join his duties. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to the Centre Head Teacher. He also made another representation to respondent No. 4 on 26th August, 2002. He was constraint to serve a legal notice upon the respondent No. 4 on 5th September, 2002 to facilitate joining of the petitioner pursuant to the recommendations : 4 : made by the Selection Committee. The Centre Head Teacher had issued a certificate on 22.10.2002. He has certified that the petitioner has started working w.e.f. 3.8.2002 as Part Time Water Carrier, but in absence of formal appointment letter, his joining could not be accepted. The fact of the matter is that the petitioner despite being recommended by the duly constituted Selection Committee was not issued appointment letter by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4. It was the duty of respondent No. 4 to ensure the issuance of appointment letter to the petitioner and also to enter into an agreement with the Gram Panchayat. The respondent No. 4 has also defied the orders of the Block Primary Education Officer. Petitioner had made all the efforts to persuade the respondent No. 4 to issue appointment letter and also enter into an agreement on behalf of the Panchayat. It will also apt at this stage to mention that the appointment of the petitioner was also assailed by one Shri Vijay Singh by way of C.W.P. No. 1259 of 2002 in this Court. The same was dismissed by the Division Bench on 7.5.2003. The petitioner has been made to suffer w.e.f. 3.8.2002 till he was permitted to join his duties in the year, 2004 as Part Time Water Carrier. He belongs to lower strata of the society. He had started : 5 : working as Part Time Water Carrier, though presence was not marked in the register in absence of appointment letter and necessary undertaking w.e.f. 3.8.2002. He has been deprived of his salary w.e.f. 3.8.2002 till his formal joining in Government Primary School, Andheri. The only person, who is responsible for delaying the entire process, is respondent No. 4. In case she had promptly acted, the petitioner could join his duties in the year, 2002 itself. It is a case where the respondent is remiss in discharge of her statutory duties. The very purpose of framing the Scheme would be defeated in case the persons like the respondent No. 4 are permitted to scuttle the entire selection process by not permitting the selected candidate to join his/her duties. It would result in immense hardship to the School going children who are supposed to be provided water by the Part Time Water Carrier. The petitioner has started discharging his duties w.e.f. 3.8.2002 as per certificate issued by the Centre Head Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Andheri. He has been illegally deprived of his salary w.e.f. 3.8.2002 till the date of his formal joining in the year, 2004. In view of the observations made hereinabove, the action of the respondent No. 4 of not : 6 : issuing the appointment letter and entering into an agreement on behalf of the Gram Panchayat with the petitioner is declared arbitrary. The respondent No. 4 is held responsible for causing delay in joining of the petitioner as Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Andheri. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent No. 4 is directed to pay the entire salary to the petitioner w.e.f. 3.8.2002 till the formal joining of the petitioner as Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Andheri in the year, 2004. The amount shall also carry interest @ 9 % per annum. This amount shall be paid by the respondent No. 4 to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. In case the amount is not paid within a period of four weeks, the Deputy Commissioner, Sirmaur is directed to recover this amount by way of arrears of land revenue and to pay the same to the petitioner. Respondent No. 4 shall also pay the cost to the petitioner quantified at Rs.5,000/-. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge. June19th, 2009. Bhupender