The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the state to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption or regularization in accordance with the applicable rules, and to provide consequential benefits commensurate with such absorption/regularization.

JUDGMENT :

M.S. Sonak, J.

Heard Mr. Amey Kakodkar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Sagar Dhargalkar, learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondents No. 1 to 3.

2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks the following substantive reliefs:

a. that this honourable court be pleased to issue writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, directions, calling for the records and on perusal thereof set aside/quash the impugned order passed by Respondent no.2;

b. Further as a consequence be [pleased to order regularization of services of Petitioner on the permanent post of Craft Instructor (Turner) at ITI-Mapusa;

19(C). Pending finalization the Respondent No. 1,2 and 4 be restrained from giving effect to impugned Order dated 27.08.2010, and continue the Petitioner on the available permanent vacancy of Craft Instructor (Turner) at I.T.I. Mapusa-Goa.

(d) Direct Respondent No. 1,2 and 4 to clear unpaid Salary from July 2008 till date for the Services rendered on the post of Craft Instructor (Turner).

19(dd). That this honorable court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directions or order commanding the Respondents to modify the order dated 25.7.2011 by removing the clause of refund of salary;

11ee. That this honorable court be pleased to command and or order interest at the normal rates on the delayed payment and compensation for the wrongful act of withholding the salary;

e. Ad-interim orders in term of prayer (c) and (d) above;

f. Any other orders deemed fit in the facts of the case;

g. For costs of petition.

3. Mr. Kakodkar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that during the pendency of the present petition, the Petitioner was paid salaries and therefore, the only relief which now survives is the relief of regularisation of the Petitioner's services with effect from 05.07.2008 as a Instructor (Turner) at the ITI, Mapusa, where he is presently discharging duties.

4. In the present case, the record indicates that the Petitioner was appointed as Highly skilled worker (CNC Deckel Milling Machine) in the Tool Room & Training Centre which was a Centre established by the Directorate of Industries & Commerce. Thereafter, by order dated 06.07.2004, the Petitioner was deputed as a Instructor (Turner) at the ITI, Mapusa, only for a period of one year. His deputation was extended from time to time by orders which have been placed on record. Ultimately, on 05.07.2008, the Tool Room and Training Centre to which the Petitioner was initially appointed, came to be abolished. The Petitioner, however, continued to function as a Instructor (Turner) at the ITI, Mapusa, which is managed by the Directorate of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Government of Goa and this position contines even till date.

5. In the meanwhile, there were attempts to advertise the post which was held by the Petitioner at ITI, Mapusa. Apprehending that the Petitioner would be displaced, the Petitioner instituted proceedings before this Court. The proceedings were disposed of with direction to consider the Petitioner's representation and dispose of the same by making reasoned orders. The representations of the Petitioner were disposed of curiously by the following two departments of the Government of Goa:-

(i) The Directorate of Industries, Trade & Commerce, which, as noted earlier, was operating the Tool Room and Training Centre, to which the Petitioner was initially appointed;

(ii) The Directorate of Skill Development & Entreneurship, which operates the ITI, Mapusa, where the Petitioner was deputed and still continues to discharge duties as Instructor (Turner).

6. The Director of Industries, Trade & Commerce disposed of the representations in favour of the Petitioner by observing that there can be no bar under the Service Rules for absorbing the Petitioner on the post of Instructor (Turner) at the ITI, Mapusa where he is