S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. All these cases relate to condition of services of work-charged employees of the State. Common questions of law being involved in all the writ petitions, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. In 1st set of the cases i.e. W.P. (S) Nos. 2166 of 2003, 2210 of 2003, 1750 of 2004, 3254 of 2004, 3588 of 2004 and 6826 of 2002 the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to regularize their services by taking over their services along with posts in the permanent (regular) establishment of the State.

3. In 2nd set of the cases i.e. W.P. (S) Nos. 3854 of 2004, 6471 of 2004, 4360 of 2004 and 4744 of 2004, the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to consider their cases for compassionate appointments. In some of the cases, their claim have been rejected by the respondents.

4. In the 3rd set of the cases i.e. W.P. (S) Nos. 3963 of 2004, 4264 of 2004, 6437 of 2004 the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay them the death-cum-retiral benefits, such as, family pension, gratuity, leave encashment, provident fund, group insurance etc.

5. The questions, involved in these writ petitions, are :

(a) Whether a work-charged employee of the State of Jharkhand can claim for consideration of his case for taking over his services in the permanent (regular) establishment? If so, is it applicable only to those, who have been appointed prior to 21st October, 1984 and completed more than five years of service in the work-charged establishment or to any work-charged employee, who has completed five years of service in the work charged establishment and is otherwise eligible and fit, irrespective of a cut-off date of appointment?

(b) Whether a dependant of a deceased work-charged employee can claim consideration of his claim for appointment in the services of the State on compassionate ground in terms of the policy/scheme, framed by the State Government? and

(c) Whether a work-charged employee or his nominee or heir is entitled to the dead-cum-retiral benefits, such as, pension/family pension, gratuity, leave encashment, provident fund, group insurance amount etc. to which a temporary Government employee is entitled?

6. To determine the issues, it is necessary to notice relevant facts of the cases in hand, Acts, Rules and Circulars/Guidelines, issued by the State Government from time to time.

CASES RELATING TO TAKING OVER THE SERVICES OF THE EMPLOYEES IN THE PERMANENT (REGULAR) ESTABLISHMENT/REGULARISATION OF SERVICES,

W.P. (S) No. 2166 of 2003 (Subhash Mandal and another v. State and others).

The case of both the petitioners is that they were initially engaged on daily wages as Jeep Driver (1st petitioner) and Van Driver (2nd petitioner) in the Public Health Engineering Division, Seraikella, in the year 1991 and 1985 respectively. They having completed more than 240 days of service requested the respondents to consider their cases for regular appointments. The respondents considered their cases and placed the matter before the Establishment Committee. In its meeting held on 18th July, 1994, after considering their cases along with other similarly situated persons, the Establishment Committee recommended for appointment of these petitioners as Drivers in the work-charged Establishment. Copy of the proceeding has been enclosed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition.

Further case of the petitioners is that on the recommendation of the Establishment Committee, they were appointed as Jeep Driver and Van Driver respectively in the pay scale of Rs. 950-1500/- in the work-charged Establishment vide Order No. 52, dated 18th July, 1995. On 28th January, 1997, the respondents issued a show cause notice on 1st petitioner vide Memo No. 76, whereby, he was asked to show that he was appointed on regular basis, to which he replied. In the meantime, it was also decided by the State Government to terminate the services of daily wage workmen, appointed a