Employees who have served continuously and satisfactorily in essential government roles have a right to regularization, regardless of the temporary labels on their employment.

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. This common order shall dispose of the aforementioned civil writ petitions as they arise from a similar factual matrix. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CWP-17191-2020.

2. The present civil writ petition(s) has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant regular pay scales of Rs.10,300– 34,800+Rs.4,400 (Grade Pay), all allowances and other consequential service benefits to the petitioners, in terms of their respective Regular Appointment Order(s) dated 29.12.2016 & 03.01.2017 (Annexures P-11 to P-11/Z) w.e.f. 29.12.2019 and 03.01.2020.

CONTENTIONS

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that the primary grievance of the petitioners as raised in the instant writ petition(s) is that they have not been granted the regular pay scales in spite of their regularisation as indicated by appointment letters (Annexures P-11 to P-11/Z). The respondent-Corporation, in contravention of the terms of the regular appointment letters, has deferred the payment of the regular pay scales. Further, vide impugned order dated 13.08.2020 (Annexure P-16), the respondent- Corporation has taken an altogether different stand and ordered that the petitioner shall be paid a salary in accordance with the D.C. rates with effect from 01.04.2018. The respondent-Corporation has changed the terms and conditions of the appointment order. Learned Senior counsel submits that the petitioners were appointed pursuant to the advertisement issued during the year 2009 to 2011 (Annexures P-4 to P-4/D). The recruitment process was initiated by the respondent-Corporation in pursuance to the said advertisements and the petitioners were selected on the basis of interviews conducted in pursuance thereof. A merit list was prepared post-interview and appointment letters (Annexure P-5 to P-5/Z) were awarded to the petitioners to the post of Financial Assistants on contract basis. Subsequently, in its meeting dated 25.11.2011, the Board of Directors of the respondent-Corporation took a policy decision to regularise the service of the employees who were appointed on contractual posts. The same issue was discussed in detail by the Board of Directors in its meeting held on 28.07.2016 and a decision was taken to regularise all the employees including Suresh Kumar, General Manager (Finance) and Sushil Kumar, Financial Analyst. However, during the pendency of the aforementioned writ petition(s), the respondent-Corporation passed two orders dated 22.10.2020(Annexure P-31 in CWP-20151-2021) and 16.02.2021 (Annexure P-33 in CWP-20151-2021), withdrawing the order of regularisation dated 29.12.2016 (Annexure P-11 to P-11/Z).

4. Learned Senior counsel further submits that the petitioners were gainfully employed in various reputed organisations when they applied against the posts advertised by the respondent-Corporation, which they resigned from their appointment. From the experience certificates of the petitioners the relevant period are available on record as Annexures P-19 to P-19/N. The petitioners are well qualified in the field of accounts and finance, possessing degrees of B.Com, M.Com, MBA and CA. The petitioners joined the respondent-Corporation under a bona fide belief that these are regular appointments and they will be entitled to all the benefits that come along with it, including regular pay scales. They have also completed the probation period of three years to the satisfaction of the respondent-Corporation and therefore, in terms of the policy decision taken o