SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(MP) 878

2005(3) JLJ 233
(SUPREME COURT)
N. Santosh Hegde and S.B. Sinha, JJ.
Mahendra L. Jain and others v. Indore Development Authority and others
Civil Appeal No. 337, 334 and 335 of 2002 : against the order of the
M.P. High Court passed in W.P. No. 1188 of 1997;
Decided on 22.11.2004.

Advocates:
Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, Dr. M.N. Rao, V.R. Reddy, S.K. Gambhir, etc. for appearing parties.

Headnote:(1) Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 (M.P.)--S.2--M.P. Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Rules, 1963--O. 2(i) and 2(vi)--Constitution of India--Arts. 14 and 16 -appointment on posts not sanctioned--Employment Exchange not intimated--no advertisement issued--Service Rules not complied with--daily wagers so appointed cannot be regularised.

       The appellants No. 1 and 2 are degree holders in Civil Engineering and appellants No.3 and 4 are diploma holders in Civil Engineering. They, having come to learn that certain vacancies exist in the respondent Authority, applied therefor although no advertisement in that behalf was issued. The respondent Authority appointed the appellants and posted them to an overseas project known as ‘Indore Habitat Project‘ which was implemented through the agency of ‘Overseas Development Authority‘ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ODA‘), on daily wages @ Rs. 63/- per day for the degree holders and Rs. 52.50 per day for the diploma holders. On or about 17.3.1997, however, they began receiving a salary of Rs. 1,500/- per month. Allegedly, from their salary, provident fund was being deducted. They were also being granted the benefit of leave.

       A dispute arose as to whether all the appellants were employed for the purpose of the said project or the appellants in civil appeal No. 337 of 2002 were appointed in the year 1991 by the Authority for its own job. An industrial dispute was raised by the appellants herein as their services were not being regularised by the respondent. The said dispute was referred for adjudication of the Labour Court, Indore, by the State of Madhya Pradesh. [Paras 2 & 3

       The Labour Court passed award in favour of the employees.

       Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said award, the respondent Authority herein filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, which was marked as Writ Petition No. 1188 of 1997. By reason of the impugned judgment dated 26.4.2000, the said writ petition was allowed. [Para 5

       Held : The posts of Sub Engineers, in which the appellants were appointed, it is nobody‘s case, were sanctioned ones. Concededly, the respondent authority, before making any appointment, neither intimated the Employment Exchange about the existing vacancies, if any, nor issued any advertisement in relation thereto. Indisputably, the conditions precedent‘ for appointment of the officers and servants of the Authority, as contained in the Service Rules had not been complied with. The appointments of the appellants were, therefore, void ab initio being opposed to •public policy as also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

       The question, therefore, which arises for consideration is as to whether they could lay a valid claim for regularization of their services. The answer thereto must be rendered in negative. Regularisation cannot be claimed as a matter of right. An illegal appointment cannot ‘be legalized by taking recourse to regularization. What can be regularized is an irregularity and not an illegality. The Constitutional Scheme which the country has adopted does not contemplate any backdoor appointment. A State before offering public service to a person must comply with the Constitutional requirements of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. All actions of the State must conform to the Constitutional requirements. A daily wager, in absence of a statutory provision in this behalf would not be entitled to regularisation. 1997(2) Vidhi Bhasvar 54 (SC), (1996) 7 SCC 499, JT 2004(6) SC 110 and JT 2004(8) SC 531 relied on. 1987 (Supp.) SCC 497 and (1992) 4 SCC 112 distinguished. [Paras 18 & 19

       (2) Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (M.P.)--Ss.47, 76-B and 85-- post not sanctioned by State Government-appointment not made in accordance with the provisions of the Adhiniyam or rules made thereunder--invalid appointments cannot be validated--such employees not entitled to regularisation.

       The 1973 Act, as noticed hereinbefore, clearly mandates that all posts should be sanctioned by the State Government and all appointments to the said cadre must be made by the State Government alone. Even the appointments to the local cadre must be made by the Authority. The said provisions were not complied with. It is accepted that no appointment letter was issued in favour of the appellants. Had the appointments of the appellants been made in terms of the provisions of the Adhiniyam and Rules framed thereunder, the respondent Authority was statutorily enjoined to make an offer of appointment in writing which was to be accepted by the appellants herein. Who made the appointments of the appel1ants to the Project or other works carried on by the Authority is ‘not known.‘ Whether the person making an appointment had the requisite jurisdiction or not is also not clear. [Para 28

       The 1973 Act or the Rules framed thereunder do not provide for appointments on ad hoc basis or on daily wages. [Para 29

       For the purpose of this matter, we would proceed on the basis that the 1961 Act is a special statute. vis-a-vis the 1973 Act and the rules framed thereunder. But in absence of any conflict in the provisions of the said Act, the conditions of service including those relating to recruitment as provided for the 1973 Act and the 1987 Rules would apply. If by reason of the latter, the appointment is invalid, the same cannot be validated by taking recourse to regularization. For the purpose of regularisation, which would confer on the concerned employee a permanent status, there must exist a post. However, we may hasten to add that regularization itself does not imply permanency. 2005(2) JLJ 117 (SC) relied on. [Para 33

       (3) Civil Servant--appointed as daily wager--scheme of provident fund and leave rules applied--nature of employment continues to be that of daily wager if no statute interdicts--equity has no role to play. JT 2004(6) SC 110 relied on. [Paras 35 & 36

       (4) Civil Servant--appointed for purposes of scheme or project--does not acquire any vested right to continue after scheme or project is over. JT 2004(6) SC 110, (2000) 10 SCC 179 and (2003) 5 SCC 388 relied on, [Para 38

       (5) Civil P.C., 1908--O.41 R.27--documents not called in trial Court--no relevance shown--cannot be called in appeal nor adverse inference can be drawn. JT 2004(8) SC 98 and JT 2004(7) SC 248 relied on. [Paras 40 & 41

       (6) Constitution of India--Arts. 14 and 39(d)-‘equal pay for equal work‘-- appointments not under statute on sanctioned posts -employees have to prove nature of work and responsibility attached to the post.

       The appellants having been employed on daily wages did not hold any pust. No post was sanctioned by the State Government. They were not appointed in terms of the provisions of the statute. They were not, therefore, entitled to take the resourse of the doctrine of ‘equal pay for equal work‘ as adumbrated in Articles 14 and 39(d) of the Constitution of India. The burden was on the appellants to establish that they had a right to invoke the said doctrine in terms of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (2003) 5 SCC 188, (2003) 6 SCC 123 and JT 2004(6) SC 110 relied on. [Para 43

       ¼1½ vkS|ksfxd fu;kstu ¼LFkk;h vkns‘k½ vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-ç-½& &/kkjk 2&e-ç- vkS|ksfxd fu;kstu ¼LFkk;h vkns‘k½ fu;e] 1963&vk-2¼,d½ rFkk 2¼Ng½&Hkkjr dk lafo/kku&vuq- 14 rFkk 16&eatwj ugha fd, x, inksa ij fu;qfDr&jkstxkj dk;kZy; çKkfir ugha&foKkiu tkjh ugha&lsok fu;eksa dk vuqikyu ugha&bl çdkj fu;qDr nSfud etnwj fu;fer ugha fd, tk ldrsA

       vihykFkhZ Ø-1 vkSj 2 flfoy bathfu;fjax esa mikf/k&/kkjd gS rFkk vihykFkhZ Ø-3 vkSj 4 flfoy bathfu;fjax esa fMIyksek /kkjd gSA ;g Kkr gksus ij fd çR;FkhZ çkf/kdj.k esa dfri; fjfDr;k¡ gS] mUgksaus muds fy, vkosnu fd;k] ;|fi ml ckjs esa dksbZ foKkiu tkjh ugha fd;k x;k FkkA çR;FkhZ çkf/kdj.k us vihykFkhZx.k dks fu;qDr dj fy;k rFkk mUgsa mikf/k&/kkjdksa ds fy, #-63@& çfrfnu vkSj fMIyksek /kkjdksa ds fy, #-52-50 çfrfnu dh nSfud etnwjh ij ^vksojlht fMosyiesaV vFkksfjVh* ¼,rfLeui‘pkr~ ^vks Mh ,* ds :i esa fufnZ"V½ ds vfHkdj.k ds ek/;e ls dk;kZfor] ^bankSj gSfcVSaV çkstsDV* ds uke ls Kkr leqnzikj ifj;kstuk ij rSukr dj fn;kA rFkkfi] 17-3-1997 dks ;k mlds vklikl] mUgsa #-1]500@& çfrekl dk osru çkIr gksus yxkA vfHkdfFkr :i ls] muds osru ls Hkfo"; fuf/k ds fy, dVkSrh dh tk jgh FkhA mUgsa NqV~Vh dk Qk;nk Hkh fn;k tk jgk FkkA

       bl ckjs esa fookn mn~Hkwr gqvk fd D;k lHkh vihykFkhZ mDr ifj;kstuk ds ç;kstu ds fy, fu;ksftr gSa ;k flfoy vihy Ø-337 lu~ 2002 ds vihykfFkZ;ksa dks lu~ 1991 esa çkf/kdj.k }kjk vius Lo;a ds dk;Z ds fy, fu;qDr fd;k x;k FkkA ,rfLeu~ vihykFkhZx.k }kjk vkS|ksfxd fookn mBk;k x;k D;ksafd çR;FkhZ }kjk mudh lsok fu;fer ugha dh tk jgh FkhA mDr fookn U;k;fu.kZ;u ds fy, e/; çns‘k jkT; }kjk Je U;k;ky;] bankSj dks funsZf‘kr fd;k x;kA ¼iSjk 2 ,oa 3½

       Je U;k;ky; us deZpkfj;ksa ds i{k esa vf/kfu.kZ; ikfjr fd;kA

       mDr vf/kfu.kZ; ls O;fFkr rFkk vlarq‘V gksdj ,rfLeu~ çR;FkhZ çkf/kdj.k us e/; çns‘k mPp U;k;ky; dh bankSj ihB ds le{k fjV ;kfpdk Qkby fd ftls fjV ;kfpdk Ø- 1188 lu~ 1997 fpfàr fd;k x;kA vkf{kIr fu.kZ; fnukad 26-4-2000 }kjk mDr fjV ;kfpdk eatwj dj yh xbZA ¼iSjk 5½

       vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ;g fdlh dk i{kdFku ugha gSa fd mibathfu;j ds ftu inksa ij vihykFkhZx.k fu;qDr fd, x, Fks og eatwjh çkIr in FksA LohÑrr%] fu;qfDr djus ls iwoZ çR;FkhZ çkf/kdj.k us fjfDr;ksa ds] ;fn dksbZ Fkh] ckjs esa u jkstxkj dk;kZy; dks çKkfir fd;k] u muds laca/k esa foKkiu gh tkjh fd;kA fufoZokn :i ls] çkf/kdj.k ds vf/kdkfj;ksa vkSj lsodksa dh fu;qfDr ds fy, lsok fu;eksa esa ;Fkk varfoZ"V iwoZ ‘krks± dk vuqikyu ugha fd;k x;k FkkA vr%] vihykFkhZx.k dh fu;qfDr;k¡ yksd uhfr ds fo#) vkSj Hkkjr ds lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 14 vkSj 16 ds vfrØe.k esa Hkh gksus dk dkj.k vkjaHk ls gh ‘kwU; FkhA

       bl çdkj] fopkjkFkZ mn~Hkwr ç‘u ;g gS fd D;k og viuh lsok ds fu;ferhdj.k ds fy, fof/kekU; nkok dj ldrs Fks\ bldk mÙkj udkjkRed gh gksxkA fu;ferhdj.k dk vf/kdkj ds :i esa nkok ugha fd;k tk ldrkA fu;ferhdj.k dk vkJ; ys dj voS/k fu;qfDr dks oS/k ugha cuk;k tk ldrkA vfu;ferrk fu;fer dh tk ldrh gS] voS/krk ughaA jk‘Vª }kjk vaxhÑr lkafo/kkfud ;kstuk esa fiNys njokts ls fu;qfDr vuq/;kr~ ugha gSaA fdlh O;fDr dks yksd lsok esa ysus ls iwoZ jkT; dks lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 14 vkSj 16 dh lkafo/kkfud vis{kkvksa dk vuqikyu djuk gksrk gSA jkT; ds lHkh dk;Z lkafo/kkfud vis{kkvksa ds vuq:i gksuk pkfg,A bl ckjs esa dkuwuh mica/k ds vHkko esa nSfud etnwj fu;ferhdj.k dk gdnkj ugha gksxkA 1997¼2½ fof/k HkkLoj 54 ¼mPpre U;k-½] ¼1996½7 ,l lh lh 499] ts Vh 2004¼6½ ,l lh 110 rFkk ts Vh 2004¼8½ ,l lh 531 voyafcrA 1987 ¼lIyh-½ ,l lh lh 497 rFkk ¼1992½ 4 ,l lh lh 112 çHksfnrA ¿iSjk 18 ,oa 19

       ¼2½ uxj rFkk xzke funs‘k vf/kfu;e] 1973 ¼e-ç-½&/kkjk 47] 76&[k rFkk 85∈ jkT; ljdkj }kjk eatwj ugha&fuqfDr vf/kfu;e ;k rn/khu cuk, x, fu;ekas ds mica/kksa ds vuqlkj ugha&vfof/kekU; fu;qfDr;k¡ fof/kekU; ugha cukbZ tk ldrh&,sls deZpkjh fu;ferhdj.k ds gdnkj ughaA

       tSlk ,rfLeuiwoZ /;ku fn;k x;k gS] lu~ 1973 ds vf/kfu;e esa Li"V vkKkfir gS fd leLr in jkT; ljdkj }kjk eatwj fd, tk,¡ rFkk mDr dkMj ij leLr fu;qfDr;k¡ dsoy jkT; ljdkj }kjk dh tk,¡A ;gk¡ rd fd LFkkuh; dkMj ij fu;qfDr;k¡ Hkh çkf/kdj.k }kjk dh tkuk pkfg,A mDr mica/kksa dk vuqikyu ugha fd;k x;kA ;g LohÑr gS fd vihykFkhZx.k ds i{k esa fu;qfDri= tkjh ugha fd, x, FksA ;fn vihykFkhZx.k dh fu;qfDr vf/kfu;e vkSj rn/khu fojfpr fu;eksa ds mica/kksa ds vuqlkj dh xbZ gksrh rc çR;FkhZ çkf/kdj.k }kjk fu;qfDr dk çLrko fd;k tkuk dkuwuh :i ls vkfn"V gksrk] ftls ,rfLeu~ vihykFkhZx.k }kjk Lohdkj fd;k tkuk gksrkA ifj;kstuk esa ;k çkf/kdj.k }kjk fd, tk jgs vU; ladeks± esa vihykFkhZx.k dh fu;qfDr fdlus dh ;g Kkr ugha gSA ;g Hkh Li"V ugha gS fd fu;qfDr djus okys O;fDr dks vko‘;d vf/kdkfjrk Fkh ;k ughaA ¿iSjk 28

       lu~ 1973 ds vf/kfu;e ;k rn/khu fojfpr fu;eksa esa rnFkZ vk/kkj ij ;k nSfud etnwjh ij fu;qfDr;k¡ micaf/kr ugha gSaA ¼iSjk 29½

       bl ekeys ds ç;kstukFkZ ge bl vk/kkj ij vxzlj gksaxs fd lu~ 1961 dk vf/kfu;e] lu~ 1973 ds vf/kfu;e vkSj rn~/khu fojfpr fu;eksa ds eqdkcys fo‘ks"k dkuwu gSA ijarq mDr vf/kfu;e ds mica/kksa esa fojks/k ds vHkko esa lsok dh ‘krsZ ykxw gksaxh ftuesa lu~ 1973 ds vf/kfu;e vkSj lu~ 1987 ds fu;eksa esa ;Fkk micaf/kr HkrhZ laca/kh ‘krsZ lfEefyr gSaA ;fn vojksDr ds dkj.k fu;qfDr vfof/kekU; gS rc fu;ferhdj.k dk vkJ; ysdj mls fof/kekU; ugha cuk;k tk ldrkA fu;ferhdj.k ds ç;kstu ds fy,] ftlls laca) deZpkjh dks LFkk;h çkfLFkfr çnÙk gksrh gS] in gksuk vko‘;d gSA rFkkfi] ge vfoyac ;g vkSj dguk pkgsaxs fd Lo;a fu;ferhdj.k ls LFkkf;Ro miyf{k;r ugha gksrkA 2005¼2½ ts ,y ts 117 ¼mPpre U;k-½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 33½

       ¼3½ flfoy lsod&nSfud etnwj ds :i esa fu;qDr&Hkfo"; fof/k dh ;kstuk rFkk NqV~Vh ds fu;e ykxw fd, x,&fdlh dkuwu esa fuf"k) ugha gks rc fu;kstu dh çÑfr nSfud etnwjh dh cuh jgrh gS&lkEk dh dksbZ Hkwfedk ughaA ts Vh 2004¼6½ ,l lh 110 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 35 ,oa 36½

       ¼4½ flfoy lsod&;kstuk ;k ifj;kstuk ds ç;kstuksa ds fy, fu;qDr&;kstuk ;k ifj;kstuk iw.kZ gks tkus ds i‘pkr~ cus jgus dk fufgr vf/kdkj vftZr ugha djrkA ts Vh 2004¼6½ ,l lh 110] ¼2000½ 10 ,l lh lh 179 rFkk ¼2003½ 5 ,l lh lh 388 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 38½

       ¼5½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &vk-41 fu-27&nLrkost fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa ugha e¡xk, x,&lqlaxrk nf‘kZr ugha&vihy esa ugha e¡xk, tk ldrs&u çfrdwy fu"d"kZ gh fudkyk tk ldrk gSA ts Vh 2004¼8½ ,l lh 98 rFkk ts Vh 2004¼7½ ,l lh 248 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 40 ,oa 41½

       ¼6½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku& &vuq- 14 rFkk 39¼?k½&^leku dk;Z ds fy, leku osru*&fuqfDr;k¡ dkuwu ds v/khu] eatwj inksa ij ugha&deZpkfjksa dks dk;Z vkSj in ls layXu mÙkjnkf;Ro dh çÑfr lkfcr djuh gksxhA

       nSfud etnwjh ij fu;ksftr gksus ds dkj.k vihykFkhZx.k in /kkj.k ugha fd, FksA jkT; ljdkj }kjk dksbZ in eatwj ugha fd;k x;k FkkA mUgsa dkuwu ds mica/kksa ds vuqlkj fu;qDr ugha fd;k x;k FkkA vr% og Hkkjr ds lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 14 rFkk 39¼?k½ esa çLrqr dh xbZ :ijs[kk ds vuqlkj ^leku dk;Z ds fy, leku osru* ds fl)kar dk vkJ; ysus ds gdnkj ugha gSaA ;g LFkkfir djus dk Hkkj vihykFkhZx.k ij Fkk fd mUgsa Hkkjr ds lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 14 ds vuqlkj mDr fl)kar dk vkJ; ysus dk vf/kdkj FkkA ¼2003½ 5 ,l lh lh 188] ¼2003½ 6 ,l lh lh 123 rFkk ts Vh 2004¼6½ ,l lh 110 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 43½

ORDER

Sinha, J.--1. These appeals arising out of a judgment and order dated 26.4.2000 passed in Writ Petition No. 1188 of 1997 by High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench, involving similar questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

Background Facts:

2. The appellants No.1 and 2 are degree holders in Civil Engineering and appellants No.3 and 4 are diploma holders in Civil Engineering. They, having come to learn that certain vacancies exist in the respondent Authority, applied therefor although no advertisement in that behalf was issued. The respondent Authority appointed the appellants and posted them to an overseas project known as 'Indore Habitat Project' which was implemented through the agency of 'Overseas Development Authority' thereinafter referred to as 'the ODA'), on daily wages @ Rs. 63/- per day for the degree holders and Rs. 52.50 per day for the diploma holders. On or about 17.3.1997, however, they began receiving a salary of Rs. 1,500/- per month. Allegedly, from their salary, provident fund was being deducted. They were also being granted the benefit of leave.

3. A dispute arose as to whether all the appellants were employed for the purpose of the said project or the appellants in civil appeal No. 337 of 2002 were appointed in the year 1991 by the Authority for its own job. An industrial dispute was raised by the appellants herein as their services were not being regularised by the respondent. The said dispute was referred for adjudication of the Labour Court, Indore, by the State of Madhya Pradesh on the following questions :

"(1) Whether non-regularisation of the Sub-Engineers (as per the listed enclosed) is valid and proper? If no, then to which relief they are entitled and what directions should be given to the employer?

(2) Whether it is valid and proper for not giving equal salary to these Sub Engineers like other Sub-Engineers in accordance with the equal work? If no, then to which relief they are entitled and what directions should be given to the employer ?"

Proceedings before the Tribunal :

4. The parties filed their respective pleadings before the Labour Court and also adduced their respective evidences. The Labour Court, on the basis of the materials produced before it, arrived at the following findings:

1. The appellants were appointed by the Indore Development Authority.

2. All the employees have been working in the establishment of the respondents for last 5-6 years.

3. Their work was satisfactory.

4. Work has been taken by the respondent from all the appellants except four.

5. Respondents had also mentioned in their claim that there was a proposal to hand over the colony of ODA Project to Indore Municipal Corporation.

6. The salary fixed by the Commissioner was earlier given to all Engineers and later on they were given the salary fixed by the Collector.

7. There is no difference in their work and the work of the employees of Indore Development Authority.

5. Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said award, the respondent Authority herein filed a writ petition before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, which was marked as Writ Petition No. 1188 of 1997. By reason of the impugned judgment dated 26.4.2000, the said writ petition was allowed.

High Court Judgment:

6. The High Court accepted the contention of the respondent Authority that the appellants were not appointed against the sanctioned posts and their services were taken on account of the said ODA Project which was implemented through the agency of the respondent-Authority. The ODA Project is said to have been completed and only the maintenance thereof was to be looked after by the Indore Municipal Corporation. It was held that the services of the appellants cannot be directed to be regularized in services. As regard the application of the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1961 (for short, 'the 1961 Act') and the Rules framed thereunder known as 'M.P
















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top