IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 2614 of 2007 Between: B. Chandrasekhar, S/o. Venkatatah, H.NO. 13-31, Post & Village Pemberthi, Jangam Mandal, Warangal District. Pin 506 201 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 UOI Rep. by its Managing Director, Centre for Railway Information System, Chanakyapuri , opp: Bihar Bhavan, New Delhi - 110021. 2 Managing Director, (Adminstration) Centre for Railway Information System, Chanakyapuri , opp: Bihar Bhavan, New Delhi - 110021. 3 Additional Register, Centre for Railway Information System, Chanakyapuri , opp: Bihar Bhavan, New Delhi - 110021. 4 General Manager, Centre for Railway Information System, Chanakyapuri , opp: Bihar Bhavan, New Delhi - 110021. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ of aMANDAMUS or any other appropriate Writ or Order/or directions duly set a side the impugned order No. CRIS/PERS/P-2508 Dt. 12- 7-2006 to R3 as it is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of Natural Justice and Violation of Article 14, 16, 21 and 309, 311 of The Constitution of India and further direct the respondent to REinstate the Petitioner back into service with all consequential beneﬁts, as the aplicant completed more than one year of regular service and medically found ﬁt in (Cee-one) category, and pass such other order/orders as deem ﬁt and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.PAVANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.S.MURTHY The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.2614 of 2007 ORAL ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.CRIS/PERS/P-2508 dated 12.7.2006 issued by third respondent as arbitrary and illegal and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. According to the petitioner, he was appointed in the Centre for Railway Information System (CRIS), an autonomous organization under Ministry of Railways, Government of India, by third respondent on 1.6.2005 as Telephone Attendant-cum- Dak Khalasi (TADK) on consolidated pay of Rs.2,679-70 ps. for a period of six months purely on ad hoc basis and later he was posted to work under Chief General Manager, CRIS, Secunderabad. Petitioner appears to have worked from 1.6.2005 to 4.7.2006 and completed one year of regular service in the pay scale of Rs.2650- 4000 (RSRP) and his case was considered for permanent absorption by third respondent vide letter dated 22.6.2006 subject to medical ﬁtness. In fact, with regard to medical ﬁtness he was examined by the Medical Superintendent, Northern Railway, Delhi and the Medical Superintendent sent a medical report stating that petitioner is found to be medically ﬁt for the said post. Thereafter, the impugned order was passed stating that Mr.K.V.Narayan Das, ex-CGM/Secunderabad, with whom petitioner was attached as TADK, has been transferred to South Western Railway, therefore petitioner’s services were terminated with eﬀect from 4.7.2006. Being aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. A detailed counter aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by the respondents denying the allegations made by the petitioner stating that the engagement of the petitioner as TADK is on co- terminus basis with the tenure of oﬃcer with whom the petitioner was attached. TADK is engaged initially on consolidated pay of Rs.2679-70 ps. per month and on completion of one year of their engagement, they are granted the scale of RS.2650-4000 subject to medical ﬁtness in C-I category. The medical examination has nothing to do with the regularization of TADK. On completion of one year as TADK, petitioner was sent for medical examination to Northern Railway Hospital, Delhi for the purpose of grant of scale of pay. Hence the contention of the petitioner that he was considered for permanent absorption is false and incorrect. The engagement of the petitioner is purely contractual for a speciﬁc period and more over, the organization in which the petitioner worked would not come under railways and it is a society registered under Societies Registration Act, therefore the writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. I have given my earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the material made available on record. The broad question as to whether the writ petition is maintainable or not need not be gone into in this case and the same is left open. Coming to the merits of the case, the contentions of the petitioner are not denied and termination was justified only on the ground that the contract period was over. This seems to be not correct. Even according to the submission made by the learned counsel for respondents, no appointment order was given, but the fact remains that the petitioner has worked for more than 398 days. This fact is admitted. Since, the petitioner had completed 398 days of service and being a workman within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the termination of his services without invoking Section 25-F of the I.D. Act was arbitrary and illegal. Therefore, the respondents could have terminated the services of the petitioner only after following the provisions of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act. On this ground alone, the termination order is liable to be set aside. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned termination order is set aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service, but without any back wages. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 23.9.2008 DA