SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(SC) 491

A. M. AHMADI, P. B. SAWANT, RANGANATH MISRA
Sandeep Kumar: Ram Nareshsah: Rajeev Kumar Tripathi: Om Prakash Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. : Union Of India: Union Of India: Union Of India – Respondent


ORDER

Petitioners, five in number, are working as Junior Engineers in a project placed under the control of the Executive Officer, City Board, Ghaziabad. We have been told that the nature of work is essentially slum clearance and the project is financed partly by the State of Uttar Pradesh and partly by World Bank funds. Petitioners have alleged that they are employed on daily rate basis and on an average receive Rs. 1,000/- per month. It is stated that no payment is made for the holidays and they are not entitled to any other benefit for the work done. Reliance has been placed on this Courts decision in the case of Ghaziabad Development Authority Engineers and some other decisions including the one in the case of Dharwad Distt. P.W.D. Literate Daily Wage Employees Association v. State of Karnataka (1990) 2 SCC 396.

2. From the facts placed before us, it appears that the scheme under which the petitioners are working is of a very specific nature. There is no permanent need for the work and since it is a project for a particular purpose, it will not be possible to direct that the petitioners may be regularised in service. From the materials, however, it appears that similarly qualifie













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top