The court emphasized the principle of upholding the absorption of employees as directed by the State Government upon the conversion of Gram Panchayats to Municipal Boards.

1. - By the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order Annex.12 dated 28.03.1997 passed by the respondent State.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the instant writ petition are that the petitioners were appointed by the Gram Panchayat, Rani which subsequently converted into Municipal Board, Rani. On formation of the Municipal Board, Rani, (for short 'the Board' hereinafter) the petitioners became the employees of the Municipal Board, Rani. By order Annex.1 dated 08.05.1989 issued by the State Govt. addressed to the Administrator/Chairman/ Executive Officer/ Commissioner of all the Municipalities of the State, it was directed that the State Govt. has decided in respect of the Gram Panchayats which have been converted to Municipal Board, the employees who have been appointed by the panchayat be absorbed as per their qualification and eligibility on Staffing Pattern against the vacant posts. However, the Gram Panchayat, Rani on being converted to Municipal Board, Rani, the petitioners herein apprehending that their services could be terminated on such conversion, filed a writ petition before this Court being S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 1504/1994. In the said writ petition, interim order dated 24.03.1994 came to be passed by this Court restraining the respondents from terminating the services of the petitioners therein. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondent Board passed a Resolution on 26.11.1994 (Annex.2) for absorption of the employees of the Gram Panchayat, Rani in the services of the respondent Board and in pursuance of Anex.2 the State Govt. was approached by the Board for issuing necessary No Objection and administrative sanction. By Resolution Annex.3 dated 26.05.1995 the respondent Board resolved to appoint the petitioners. By order Annex.4 dated 09.06.1995, the Executive Officer of the respondent Board issued the order appointing the petitioners on the various posts. By communication Annex.5 dated 16.08.1996, the Chairman/ Executive Officer of the respondent Board approached to the Deputy Secretary, Local Self Govt. Department for according administrative sanction in respect of the persons who have been appointed on converting the Gram Panchayat to Municipal Board. A reminder was also sent to the respondent State Govt. vide Annex.6. In pursuance thereof, the respondent State inquired from the respondent Board regarding the sanctioned posts for the Budgeting Year 1996-97 and the economic condition of the Board vide Annex.7. The respondent Board vide Annex.8 informed the State Government regarding the sanctioned posts as also informed about the economic condition of the Board being sound. However, by order Annex.9, the Executive Officer of the respondent Board again requested for according sanction of the posts. By order Annex.10, the Executive Officer of the respondent Board asked the petitioners to withdraw the writ petition filed by them stating therein that in the meeting of the Board held on 26.05.1995 by Resolution No.2 dated 01.06.1995 the petitioners have been given the regular pay scale on the condition that they would withdraw the writ petition. In pursuance thereof, the petitioners withdrew the writ petition. A similar communication was addressed to all the petitioners by Annex.11 by the Executive Officer of the respondent Board serving a notice of 15 days for withdrawing the said writ petition else they will be placed in the original position and that being the position, the petitioners withdrew the writ petition on 17.04.1996 as they were communicated having given regular pay scale and were requested to withdraw the writ petition. Thereafter, by order impugned Annex.12 dated 28.03.1997, the Resolution passed by the Board dated 26.05.1995 and the order dated 09.06.1995 appointing the petitioners came to be cancelled. Hence this writ petition.

3. A reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondent