Civil Writ Petition No. 7700 of 2007 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No. 7700 of 2007 Date of Decision: 29.4.2008 Mahesh Kumar and Others …Petitioners Versus The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ludhiana and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. B.N.Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioners. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on July 19, 2007 passed the following order:- “In view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Allahabad Jal Sansthan v. Daya Shankar Rai and another, (2005) 5 SCC 124, Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Bhola Singh AIR 2005 SC 1790, Gangadhar Pillai v. Siemens Ltd. (2007)1 SCC 533, Reserve Bank of India v. Gopinath Sharma and another (2006) 6 SCC 221, Himanshu Kumar Vidyarthi v. State of Bihar AIR Civil Writ Petition No. 7700 of 2007 2 1967 SC 3657, Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Worken (2007)1 SCC 408, J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. K.P.Agrawal, (2007) 2 SCC 433, HUDA v. Jagmal Singh (2006)5 SCC 764, Municipal Corporation, Samrala v. Raj Kumar, (2006) 3 SCC 81, Rattan Singh v. Union of India and another (1997)11 SCC 396, General Manager, Haryana Roadways v. Rudhan Singh (2005) 5 SCC 591, Municipal Council, Samrala v. Sukhwinder Kaur (2006)6 SCC 516, U.P.SRTC Ltd. v. Sarada Prasad Misra (2006) 4 SCC 733, Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Umadevi (3) and Others (2006) 4 SCC 1, UP State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. and another v. Uday Narain Pandey (2006)1 SCC 479, State of U.P. v. Neeraj Awasthi (2006) 1 SCC 667 and D.B. Judgment of this Court in Rajinder Singh CWP No. 4980 of2005 decided on 28.3.2006, there is no merit in this petition. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Adjourned sine die”. The ratio of above said judgments has been reiterated by this Court to say that unless an employee is appointed as per rules and regulations, his appointment cannot be treated to be consistent with Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution. Appointment given de hors the Civil Writ Petition No. 7700 of 2007 3 rules and regulations is liable for termination and is covered under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short “the Act”) and thus does not amount to retrenchment. It has been also held that reinstatement of workman in public employment will not be consistent with Article 14 unless a workman had been appointed by following rules and regulations. To distinguish the judgments in the order dated July 19, 2007, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Chandra Shekhar Azad Krishi Evam Prodyogiki Vishwa Vidyalaya v. United Trades Congress and Another (2008)1 Supreme Court Cases (L&S) 504. We have perused the judgments. Para 19 and 20 of judgment rendered in Chandra Shekhar Azad Krishi Evam Prodyogiki Vishwa Vidyalay's case (supra), are reproduced as under:- “19. Service of Respondent 2 were not terminated. He has been continuing to serve the University. We have noticed hereinbefore that in a writ petition filed by other employees on a concession made by the counsel for the University, a purported scheme dated 24.4.2000 has been formulated. Dr. Padia in that view of the matter stated before us that despite the legal position, as noticed hereinbefore, in the event the case of Respondent 2 comes within the purview of the said Civil Writ Petition No. 7700 of 2007 4 scheme, his services shall be regularised when his turn comes therefor. 20. We place on record the aforementioned statement made by Dr. Padia that as and when Respondent 2 becomes entitled to be considered for being absorbed in the services of the University pursuant to the said scheme, his case may be considered. If his turn for consideration for regularization has already come, a decision thereupon shall be taken as expeditiously as possible”. In the above said judgment legal position has been determined against the workmen. However, because of concession noticed, the case was decided on its own facts. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the award and the same is upheld and the present writ petition is dismissed. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge (Ashutosh Mohunta) Judge April 29, 2008 “DK”