C.W.P. No.3195 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.3195 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 04, 2009 Savita Devi .....PETITIONERS Versus State of Haryana and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL --- Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Vivek Lamba, A.A.G.,Haryana, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.Raman B. Garg, Advocate, for respondent No.4. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioner has filed the instant petition for issuing directions to the Deputy Commissioner, Tohana (respondent No.3) and Municipal Committee, Tohana (respondent No.4) to absorb her on the post of Safai Mazdoor in accordance with the instructions dated 21.3.2006 (Annexure P8) issued by the Haryana Government. It is the case of the petitioner that when the employees of Municipal Committees in Haryana went on strike, the petitioner was selected and appointed by SDM, Tohana and was directed to join her duties on 1.12.1997. It is further the case of the petitioner that as per letter dated 1.2.1997 (Annexure P-1/T), the petitioner was appointed on the aforesaid post temporarily in Municipal Committee, Tohana in the pay scale of C.W.P. No.3195 of 2008 -2- Rs.750-940. It is further stated that the said appointment was made in view of the Government decision dated 20.12.1996 wherein it was decided that to substitute the strike workers, the appointment be made from the open market. It is further the case of the petitioner that subsequently the workers on strike returned to work and thereafter the services of the petitioner were terminated. In the petition, it has not been stated when the services of the petitioner were terminated and how many days she had worked. It has been further averred that on 13.5.1997 the Government had issued the instructions to the effect that the employees, who were engaged during the strike period, should be adjusted against the vacant posts, but no step was taken by the respondents in terms of those instructions. It is further the case of the petitioner that she had been repeatedly approaching the respondents by making detailed representations, but no action was taken. It is further the case of the petitioner that on 21.3.2006, Haryana Government had issued fresh instructions to all the Deputy Commissioners in the State, calling upon them to give the details of the employees who had worked during the strike period in the Municipal Committees. In pursuance of the said instructions, respondent No.4 submitted a detailed list to the office of respondent No.2 in which the name of the petitioner finds mentioned as an employee who had worked during the strike period. When the services of the petitioner were not absorbed in Municipal Committee, she filed the instant writ petition. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No.4, it has been averred that as per record of the Municipal Council, Tohana, the petitioner had worked on muster rolls only from 14.2.1997 to 15.6.1997 and not during the whole strike period which subsisted from 16.12.1996 to 4.3.1997. It has been further averred that no appointment letter was issued C.W.P. No.3195 of 2008 -3- to the petitioner by the competent authority, i.e., Executive Officer. Moreover, the petitioner had left the job on her own. It has been stated that the claim of the petitioner deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. The petitioner is basing her claim on the alleged working with the Municipality during the strike period from 14.2.1997 to 15.6.1997 and the policy dated 13.5.1997, whereby it has been decided that all ad hoc and daily wager employees recruited against the vacancies during the strike should be adjusted as per their seniority and in case there is no vacancy, a seniority list be made for their future adjustment on priority basis. It has been further averred that on 19.2.2007, the State Government had issued another policy letter to all the Municipalities in the State, thereby conveying its decision not to re-adjust the employees who had worked in the Municipalities during the strike. The said policy decision has been upheld by this Court in CWP No.5280 of 2006 (Narender Kumar Versus The Municipal Council, Ambala City and others) decided on 11.03.2008, and rejected the claim of appointment made under the previous policy. After hearing the counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has filed false petition as she was not appointed on the post of Safai Mazdoor in the Municipality during the strike period. The alleged appointment letter (Annexure P1) has not been found in the records of the Municipality nor the same was issued by the competent authority, i.e. Executive Officer. In the petition, the petitioner has not disclosed as to how many days she had worked on that post. As per record of the Municipality, the petitioner had worked on muster rolls from 14.2.1997 to 15.6.1997 and not during the whole strike period. Therefore, in terms of the Policy dated 24.4.2001, the C.W.P. No.3195 of 2008 -4- petitioner is not entitled to be appointed against the vacant posts of Safai Mazdoors as she had not worked during whole strike period. Further, on 19.2.2007, the State Government had issued policy letter to all the Municipalities in the State in supersession of letter/instructions dated 21.3.2006, thereby conveying its decision not to re-adjust the employees who had worked in the Municipalities during the strike. The said policy decision has been upheld by this Court in CWP No.5280 of 2006 (Narender Kumar Versus The Municipal Council, Ambala City and others) decided on 11.03.2008, and rejected the claim of appointment made under the previous policy. Moreover, the petition suffers from delay and laches. Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances, I do not find any merit in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed. November 04, 2009 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE