C.W.P. No.15540 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.15540 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION: OCTOBER 13, 2009 Sumer Singh .....PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL --- Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Kirti Singh, 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, Bhiwani (respondent No.3) and Municipal Council, Bhiwani (respondent No.4) to absorb him on the post of Clerk in accordance with the instructions dated 21.3.2006 (Annexure P7) 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 the SDM, Bhiwani and was directed to join his duties on 24.12.1996. In the petition, it has not been disclosed on which post he was selected and appointed and till when he had worked on the said post. It is the case of the petitioner that no appointment letter was issued to him. It is further stated that the said appointment was made in view of the C.W.P. No.15540 of 2007 -2- 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 that when the services of the petitioner were terminated and how many days he had worked. It is 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 he 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.3 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. The petitioner also served a legal notice upon respondent Nos.2 to 4. When no action was taken on the said legal notice, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, it has been stated that the petitioner did not work during the strike period with Municipal Committee, Tosham (Bhiwani) and the question of issuance of any appointment letter to him and taking him back in service does not arise. C.W.P. No.15540 of 2007 -3- In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No.4, it has been stated that the petitioner was not appointed in Municipal Council, Bhiwani or elsewhere. As per the records of the Municipal Council, Bhiwani as well as Municipal Committee, Tosham, the petitioner had not worked at all during the strike period, which subsisted from 16.12.1996 to 4.3.1997. It has been stated that the petitioner has manipulated his name at a later stage only to come illegally in municipal service. It has been further stated that the name of the petitioner never figured in the list of employees of strike period prepared in the wake of policy Annexures P-2 to P-4 and forwarded to respondent No.2 in the year 1998. It has been stated that as per the cash book and accounts, the petitioner was never paid any wages during the strike period. It has also been specifically stated that the name of the petitioner was forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure P-8/T only on the basis of an application submitted by him without looking into the record. It has further been stated that the petitioner has manipulated his name at a later stage only to come in municipal service after a lapse of seven years of the policy dated 13.5.1997 (Annexure P2) without having worked during the strike period. The averments made on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and 4 have not been controverted at all. 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 and frivolous petition by claiming that he was appointed during the strike period by SDM, Bhiwani and the Executive Officer, Municipal Committee, Bhiwani, and after some time his services were terminated. In the petition, even the petitioner has not disclosed on which post he was appointed and up to which time he remained on that post. From the record, it appears that the C.W.P. No.15540 of 2007 -4- petitioner has totally made a false claim only on the basis of letter dated 25.4.2007 (Annerxure P8/T) written by the Deputy Commissioner, Bhiwani to the Director, Urban Local Bodies, Haryana to the effect that the petitioner had worked during the strike period from 24.12.1996 to 22.2.1997 in Municipal Committee, Tosham. In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been specifically stated that the petitioner did not work at all in Municipal Committee, Tosham (Bhiwani) and the said letter was written only on the basis of the application made by the petitioner, without verifying the facts from the records. If the petitioner had worked for a particular period, he could have mentioned the said fact in the writ petition. No such period has been mentioned in the writ petition. Further, 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. Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that this petition has been filed on false facts. The petitioner was never appointed during the strike period and he never worked and drawn any salary from Municipal Committee, Tosham (Bhiwani). Hence, this petition is dismissed with costs, which are assessed as Rs.10,000/-. October 13, 2009 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE