IMPORTANT POINT
The need for a detailed representation from the petitioners seeking regularisation of their services and supporting documents for consideration by the respondents.

ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue Writ, Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus or any appropriate writ declaring the inaction of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioners to regularise their services as illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the petitioners and regularise their services as per their own rules and under the provisions of I.D.Act and direct payment of arrears from the date of petitioners relieving the respondents organisation after extension period.

2. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is as follows:

a) The respondents’ organisation invited the petitioners (walk-in-interview) and conducted interview on 02.11.2008 for the various posts including the post of Junior Artisan (Fitter) on contract for a period of two years to which the petitioners applied.

b) Subsequent to the interview, the petitioners were appointed as Junior Artisans in skilled grade for a period of two years as per the notification issued vide Memo No.Adv.No.22/2008. The petitioners were given offer letter of appointment on 11.02.2009.

c) The respondent authority called for the application with experience in their respective trade. The work discharged by the petitioners is permanent in nature and the petitioners have fulfilled all the conditions of the qualifications and experiences. The selection and appointments were done by the respondents as per the recruitment rules treating the petitioners as permanent employees.

d) The respondents have extended their contract period further for a period of six months initially vide memo No.ECIL:PG(E): 5555, dated 07.02.2011. The petitioners came to know that the respondents are going to issue fresh notification for appointing skilled workers as regular appointment. In the event, the vacancies are filled up by the outsiders, the legitimate right of the petitioners would vanish and it will lead to gross violation of settled principles of law. The petitioners completed two and half years of service without break. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of Section 25 of the I.D. Act. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Counter affidavit filed by the Respondents, in brief, is as follows:

a) Advertisement No.22 of 2008 was issued purely on contractual basis for a period of two years by specifying the terms and conditions therein and the petitioners accepted the said terms and conditions. The contract period was extended for a further period of six months.

b) The petitioners were relieved in the month of August, 2011 from the service consequent to the conclusion of the extended period of contract.

c) The petitioners are not in service as on the date of filing of the present writ petition. The services of the petitioners were engaged due to exigency of work for a period of time in the project sites that were awarded to M/s ECIL and the same is not permanent in nature. Hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

PERUSED THE RECORD

4. It is specifically averred by the petitioners at paras 3 and 7 of the affidavit as under:

“3. It is to submit the Respondents Organization invited the petitioners (Walk-in-interview) and further, they passed the trade test and subsequently conducted interview on 02.11.2008 for the various posts including the post of Junior Artisan (Fitter, Electronics, Electrical, draftsman, Radio and T.V) on contract for a period of 2 years to which the Petitioners applied. Subsequent to the interview, the Petitioners were appointed as Junior Artisans in Wage Group IV for a period of 2 years as per the notification issued vide memo No. Advt. No. 22/2008. The Petitioner wrere given an offer letter of appointment on 11.02.2009. Since February, 2009, the Petitioners have been discharging their assignment duties to th