IMPORTANT POINT
The court held that regularization of employees cannot be claimed retrospectively unless supported by sufficient sanctioned posts, reaffirming the discretion of the Corporation in policy matters.

JUDGMENT :

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)

1. The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.09.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the captioned writ petition filed by the respondents-employees of the appellant-Corporation. The learned Single Judge has held that the respondents-employees are entitled to be regularized in service from the date on which they completed service of 5 years and 900 days i.e. from 01.11.2005 and not from the date on which the regularization order was passed.

BRIEF FACTS:

2. Initially, in the year 2000, the daily wagers employed by the appellant-Corporation, filed writ petition being Special Civil Application No.5019 of 2001 and allied matters before this Court seeking regularization.

3. During the pendency of the aforesaid petition, the policy decision was taken by the appellant-Corporation by passing a Resolution No.447 of 2004 on 13.08.2004, inter alia declaring that the daily-wagers, who have completed 5 years and 900 days in service as on 15.08.2004, will be regularized by creating supernumerary posts. Accordingly, the appellant- Corporation passed an order on 15.08.2004, regularizing 2823 employees, and they were all made permanent with effect from 15.08.2004 and not from the retrospective dates of completion of 5 years and 900 days in their services. Accordingly, by the order dated 03.09.2004, the writ petition being Special Civil Application No.5019 of 2001 along with allied matters were disposed of on the basis of the said Resolution No.447 of 2004 dated 13.08.2004.

4. It appears that thereafter, a dispute arose with regard to the regularization of other employees, which culminated into writ petitions being Special Civil Application Nos.21853 to 21899 of 2006. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 29.10.2007, disposed of the writ petitions by directing the appellant-Corporation to consider their cases for regularization as per the Policy of “5 years/900 days”. In the said order dated 29.10.2007, passed by the learned Single Judge, a Speaking to Minutes for necessary correction was filed, whereupon the words “5 years/900 days” came to be corrected as “5 years and 900 days.

5. Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 29.10.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application Nos.21853 to 21899 of 2006, the appellant-Corporation issued a Resolution/Order bearing GDEST No.H/5644 dated 17.03.2008, regularizing the service of 51 daily-wagers including the present 45 respondents-employees with effect from 17.03.2008 by creating supernumerary posts. It appears that thereafter, Misc. Civil Application No.749 of 2009 was filed by the appellant-Corporation in the aforesaid writ petitions seeking review of the order dated 29.10.2007, which was disposed of by the order dated 27.03.2009.

6. After the aforesaid benefit was granted to the present respondents-employees with effect from 17.03.2008, i.e. the date from passing of the resolution/order; after a period of one year and nine months, they filed the captioned writ petition seeking regularization with effect from 01.11.2005 instead of 17.03.2008, being the date on which they have completed five years and 900 days. The learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 18.09.2018, has allowed the captioned writ petition. The same has given rise to the present Letters Patent Appeal.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS

7. Learned senior advocate Mr. Kamal Trivedi appearing for the appellant-Corporation has submitted that after having accepted the benefit of regularization with effect from 17.03.2008, the respondents-employees after a period of one year and nine months, filed the writ petition claiming regularization from the date of completion of 5 years and 900 days. It is submitted that earlier also, when the policy decision was taken vide Resolution No.447 of 2004, dated 13.08.2004, 2823 employees were made permanent from 15