IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. s. Novggg OF 2010 L PETITIONER : Vinod Kumar Shrivastva S/o late Shri MK. Shrivastvaz aged about—48 years, R/o C/O Shri J..B. Yadav, J.B.C. Sun Rise School, Devri Khurd, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS /;.,~’°“L;nion of India through the General Manager South Eastern Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G.). The Divisional Railway Manager, Bilaspur Division, South Eastern Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G.). Senior Divisional Personnel Officer Bilaspur Division, South Eastern Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G.). i WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE g CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT/WRITSg ” ORDER] ORDERS, DIRECTION/ DIRECTIONS ETC:- / “ 4941/ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETJTION (S) No.2978 of 2010 Vinod Kumar Shrivastava PETITIONER VERSUS Union of India & Others RESPONDENTS Judgment for consideration ,c«_.~ ,»\,“/ j: A,_.-. Sd/— SATISH K. AGNHIOTRJ ; Judge J é Hon’ble Shri Justice Radh'e Shyam Sharma W I 3 /V‘X v RS. Sharma Judge Post for pronouncement of the judgment on the Zo—Kday of June, 2011 ’I Sd/— . H Satish K. Agnihotrl Judge t, x r I 7$ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No.2978 of 2010 PETITIONER : Vinod Kumar Shrivastava VERSUS RESPONDENTS Union of India & Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Coram : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Aqnihotri & Hon’ble Sh‘ri Radhe Shvam Sharma, JJ. Present: Shri M.K.Sinha, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Naushina Afrin Ali, Advocate for the respondents. (Delivered on .2 away of June, 201 1) Per Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order dated 30.07.2008 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, in O.A. No. 203/2006. Further, a direction to the respondent No. 2 and respondent No3 for regularizing the services of the petitioner as Primary Teacher W.e.f. 19.09.1994 i.e. the date from which other similarly situated casual teachers were regularized. 2. The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioner, are that initially, the petitioner was appointed as casual labour in Mixed High School, Shahdol, on daily wages basis vide order dated 01.12.1981 (Annexure P/2) issued by the respondent No. 3. After completion of 125 days as casual labour, the petitioner was granted the temporary status and thereafter, he was ?X7 granted C.P.C. scale. Subsequently, the pay scale was revised time and again. Some of the similarly situated casual employees filed an O.A. Nor 545/1989 before the Central Administrative Tribunal wherein the Tribunal directed the respondents to consider their case for regularization vide order dated 19.01.1994. In pursuance of the said order. the respondent N0. 3, vide order dated 19.09.1994 (Annexure P/3) invited the original testimonials of the applicants for considering their cases for, regularization. The petitioner also submitted his relevant documents. Thereafter, a list of selected candidates for regularization was published in which the name of the petitioner was not mentioned, the reason being that vigilance enquiry was pending against him. A charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on 13.12.1996 alleging that he had submitted a fake certificate of B.Ed. degree before the selection panel. The said allegation was denied by the petitioner, but ultimately, after departmental enquiry, the petitioner was punished with lowering down his pay scale to the initial stage with cumulative effect for a period of three years vide order dated 04.09.1999. The petitioner was again issued a show cause notice on 12.08.2005, proposing to terminate his service on the basis of allegations leveled in the charge sheet dated 13.12.1996. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal being O.A. No. 764/2005 which was decided on 26.08.2005, wherein the respondents were restrained to take any action against the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner made several representations for regularization of his services, but nothing was done. ‘}s/ Shri Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that though the petitioner has been regularized in service W.e.f. 08.022004, however, the petitioner ought to have been regularized W.e.f. 190094994 when the other similarly situated empioyees were regularized. Thus, the action of the respondent authorities is arbitrary and illegal. 4‘ On the other hand, Msi Naushina Afrin Ali, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, would submit that the petitioner submitted a fake certificate of B.Ed degree for which he was punished also by reducing his pay scale to the initial stage The petitioner was afforded an opportunity to prefer an appeal within a period of 45 days but the petitioner has not chosen to prefer any appeal. Later on, after submitting a genuine B.Ed degree by the petitioner which was the requisite qualification for considering the case for regularization, which was obtained by him from MP. Bhoj (Open) UniversityfBhopal, in the year 2004, he was considered and regularized on the post of Primary School Teacher in the scale of Rs. 4500 — 7000/- w.e.f. 08.02.2005 vide order dated 11.11.2006 (Annexure R/2). Thus, the learned Tribunal has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner for grant of regularization from the year 1994. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 6. lt is an admitted position that the petitioner was initially appointed as a casual labour on daily wages basis. The v petitioner has also not produced any document to indicate asto what was the nature of his appointment, whether he wast appointed after due selection process on inviting application \ \ \ 9g 4 from other sumllarly Situated persons by way of advertisemont or othenmse It ls also an admitted fact that at one pomt of time the petitioner had submitted a fake B Ed degree certificate for wlm‘h he was penahzed by reduction of his pay scale Later the respondent authorities consrdered the case of the petitioner for regularization on submitting a genuine certificate. workers on occurrence of regular vacanCIes which cannot be directed With effect from the date others were regularized on the ground that the petitioner was not in possesSion of valid B Ed certificate. The regularization was granted with effect from the date the petitioner obtained, valid B.Ed, certificate from the MP. Bhoj (Open) University, Bhopal, in the year 2004. We do not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order and, as such, no. interference is warranted. 8. Be that as it may, it is a trite law that a temporary, ad hoc employee/daily wager or contract appointee cannot claim regularization, continuance or reinstatement in service on the basis of appointment, which was temporary and not in accordance with law and the same was de hors the constitutional scheme of employment (See Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umadevi‘ (3) and Othersh mdi'an Drugs & Pharmaceutica/s Ltd. M Workmen, Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.2, Official Liquidator v. Dayanand and others3 and State of Punjab arid Others V. Surf/t Singh and Others"). (”006) 4 SCC 1 (2007) 1 SCC 408 2008) 1O SCC 1 (2039) gscc 514 In View of foregoing, without going into the question asto whether the regularization was valid or not, the petition is shorn of merit and accordingly the same is hereby dismissed, 10. There shall be no order asto costs. L4 ‘ ‘ Sdl- Rs. Sharma SATISH K. AGNIHom Judge Sd/- l i Judge g