The court emphasized the justification of termination based on the findings of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the applicability of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.

1. The petitioners were engaged as drivers in February 1994 in the Haryana Roadways, Ambala Depot, Ambala on contract basis. The two petitioners have claimed regularization of their services. An agreement was reached between the Government and the recognized Union of Workers of Haryana Roadways on June 16, 1994 wherein it was decided that contractual drivers and conductors would be entitled to benefit of uniform on completion of one year of service and they would be further entitled to regularization against vacancies on completion of two years of service. Accordingly, the policy decision was taken in the shape of instructions dated July 28, 1994. The Government withdrew the policy decision on November 17, 1995. Still further by instructions dated September 26, 1997 the instructions dated November 17, 1995 stand withdrawn. The immediate effect of which the petitioners say was that the revival of the policy decision dated July 28, 1994 had been revived. Their claim for regularization is based in this manner.

2. When the instructions were withdrawn some of the affected conductors and drivers approached this Court challenging the action in CWPs 11174 of 1997 and 12697 of 1997 which petitions were allowed by the Division Bench by their Lordships judgment dated November 22, 1997. It was held that the petitioners therein were entitled for consideration for regularization from the date they completed two years of service. Accordingly, in the light of above said decision read with the agreement dated June 16, 1994 and the policy dated July 28, 1994 the Transport Commissioner, Haryana reconsidered the matter and issued another policy decision laying down that all drivers and conductors working on contractual basis who had completed two years of service from June 16, 1994 to January 08, 1998 are entitled for regularization from the year 1998. The services of all drivers and conductors working on contractual basis who had completed two years of service had been regularized pursuant thereto but the petitioners were left out of consideration. The ruling was obviously read in personam. They represented to the authorities for similar treatment. They met with little success.

3. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court in CWP No.6071 of 1999 in the present petition and notice of motion was issued for July 23, 1999. No interim orders were passed in the first hearing on May 07, 1999. Pending litigation, the services of petitioner No.1-Ram Dia were terminated vide impugned order dated June 07, 1999 which had led to filing of the amended writ petition challenging the order of termination as well.

4. There are thus two parts of this writ petition. One is for setting aside the order of termination qua the 1st petitioner and then for regularizing his services, while the 2nd petitioner claimed regularization alone at that stage. When the matter was taken up for final hearing, the learned Law Officer for the State of Haryana pointed out on the strength of reply to the application No.6083 of 2015 filed by the petitioner that the memo dated March 23, 1998 (Annex P-3) regarding regularization of services of drivers and contractors working on contractual basis there is a serious misrepresentation in the typing of the material text of paragraph 4 of the instructions and, therefore, a false copy of the annexure has been placed on record where the word “not” is intentionally typed as “got” which changes the meaning in favour of the petitioners. The true text of the policy dated March 23, 1998 has been placed at Annex R-1/A. The misquoted para.4 actually reads as follows:-

“4. The drivers and conductors on contractual basis against whom disciplinary actions are pending be got regularized in service till their cases are finalised. In such eventualities posts be kept vacant for such workers till the finalisation of their cases.”

5. The word “got” changes the meaning completely and even in cases where contractual drivers and conduct