Back
1997 Supreme(Guj) 213
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :S.K.Keshote
Govindbhai C.Chauhan - Appellant
Versus
Chairman, Scheduled Caste Economic Development Corporation - Respondent
S.C.A. 8639 of 1988
Decided On : 05/01/1997
Headnote:(a) Constitution of India, 1950 — Art. 226 — Person seeking relief under — Must come with clean hand — Suppression of material facts — Petition must fail.
The petitioner has deliberately concealed the fact that the suit filed by him in the Civil Court has been dismissed.
In proceedings under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, which are initiated for attracting extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court, it is of utmost importance that the petitioner should come forward with clean hands. This Court cannot encourage the idea that a person is entitled to adopt dubious or dishonest or fraudulent means and make false averments while submitting writ petition in this Court and further when his falsehood in exposed by the other side putting the correct facts before the Court, it would not be proper to allow the petitioner to make his submissions on merits of the case. It would be laying down a very dangerous principle in the conduct of human affairs if the Courts of law are allowed to be flooded with petitions based on false averments. This Court can help in its extraordinary jurisdiction only those persons who approach the Court with clean hands, and if in a given case the Court finds that the conduct of the petitioner has not been honest, the Court may decline to give any relief to the petitioner.
[Para 16]
(b) Service Law — Termination — Employees working on daily wages — Long duration — Not sufficient to claim regularisation.
The period of working on daily wage is of no significance or substance as daily wagers have no right to the post. In view of this position the contentions raised by the Councel for the petitioners has no merits. All these petitions deserve to be dismissed only on the ground that the petitioners have no right to the posts, though all these petitioners are working on the posts, may be under the order of the Court. The respondent-Board has admitted that 8 posts of clerks are lying vacant in the Corporation. It is, therefore, ordered that the petitioners may be given an opportunity to complete for selection, and recruitment against these posts. The respondent-Corporation is directed to advertise the eight vacancies for selection and recruitment within a period of two months from today. It shall be open to the petitioners to apply for the posts. Selection and recruitment to those posts may be made within six months from today. Those petitioners who would be selected and appointed on the posts shall be continued in service, but the services of those who fail to get selected shall come to an end automatically on the date the selected candidates join services.
[Para 22]
( 1 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. As the facts and grounds on which the challenge has been made to the action of the respondents to terminate the services of the petitioners proceed on the common facts and grounds, all these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order.
( 2 ) SPECIAL Civil Application No. 8639 of 1988 :there are in all, four petitioners in this special Civil Application. The petitioner no. 1 was selected as apprentice by the respondent-Corporation with effect from 30th September 1985. This apprenticeship was with effect from 30th September 1985. This apprenticeship was for one year, i. e. upto 30th September 1986. On completion of the aforesaid apprenticeship, the petitioner, as per his own case, was appointed on daily wages as Junior Assistant. The petitioner No. 2 was also selected as trainee for apprenticeship with effect from 30th september 1985 to 30th September 1986 and on completion of the said period, he was given appointment on the post of junior Assistant on daily wages. The petitioner no. 3 was selected to undergo apprenticeship for one year from 30th September 1986 to 30th September 1987. Then she was given appointment on the post of junior Assistant on daily wages with effect from 1 -10-87. Similarly, the petitioner No. 4 was also selected for apprenticeship with effect from 1st October 1987 to 1st October 1988 and after completion of the said period, he was given appointment on daily wages as Junior Assistant. It is the case of these petitioners that they were ordered to be continued on the post of Junior Assistants on daily wages for all these years though they made representations from time to time for their absorption in regular service. The petitioners filed this petition before this Court and the prayer has been made for direction to the respondents to absorb them on permanent post of Junior assistant in the pay scale of the post, to provide them the benefits of permanency, seniority and have also prayed for further directions to give them benefits of the pay scale from the date of completion of apprenticeship. This petition has come up for admission before this Court on 30th December 1988 on which date, notices were issued and by way of interim relief, the respondents were directed to maintain status quo as regards the service of the petitioners. On 2nd February 1989, this Court ordered:"rule. Status quo to continue. Despite the status quo order, it will be open to the respondents to give any appointments to the petitioners as they deem fit, even including ad hoc appointments. " after filing of this Special Civil Application, the petitioners prayed for amendment of the Special Civil Application, which was granted. Para 12a has been inserted wherein the petitioners have made a grievance that in total disregard of the provisions of Section 25f of the Industrial disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act 1947), the respondents sought to terminate the services of the petitioners. It is not in dispute that all the petitioners are continuing in service of the respondents on daily wages under the interim relief granted by this Court.
( 3 ) SPECIAL Civil Application No. 7671 of 1989 :there are two petitioners in this Special civil Application. The first petitioner was appointed as Gujarati Typist on daily wages on 1-12-86. The petitioner No. 1 came to be appointed, as per his own case, pursuant to his name being recommended by the Employment Exchange, albeit for the post of apprentice. On 16-9-87, the petitioner No. 1 gave an application to the respondent for being appointed as an apprentice (Junior Clerk ). The petitioner states that on 1-10-87, he was promoted to the post of apprentice Clerk. Under the letter dated 9th October 1987, the petitioner no. 1 was directed to undergo training as apprentice for a period of one year. The petitioner No. 1 has completed that period and thereafter he was appointed as apprentice clerk, as per his own case,
