Advocates:
['SANDEEP SAXENA', 'N A NAQVI AAG', '', 'REASHM BHARGAVA', 'M C SHARMA']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN,

JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

JUDGMENT

Paras Kumar Jain

Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Others

(S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.1662/2003)

S. B. Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India.

Date of Judgment:

March 5^th, 2010

PRESENT

Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. S. Chauhan

Mr. Sandeep Saxena, for the petitioner.

Mr. N.A. Naqvi, Addl. Advocate General, for respondents.

BY THE COURT:

Aggrieved vide order dated 25-10-2002, whereby the

Director Local Self Government had declared that the Screening

Committee did not find the Junior Engineers, working in Municipal

Boards eligible for regularisation, the petitioner has challenged the

said order before this Court.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had done his

diploma in Civil Engineering from Polytechnic College, Ajmer. Initially,

the petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) in Municipal

Board, Jahajpur (Bhilwara) on daily wages basis on 28-6-1994. He

worked there till 31-5-1995. From 1-6-1995 till 31-8-1995, he worked

in Municipal Board Shahpura, District Bhilwara. Subsequently, he

was appointed on daily wages basis on 1-11-1995 in Municipal Board

Puskar. Thereafter, his services have been extended, from time to

time, by respondent No.2, the Municipal Board, Puskar. The post of

Junior Engineer (Civil) in Municipal Board, Puskar is a sanctioned

post.

3.

Considering the fact that a large number of Junior Engineers

(Civil) were working in different Municipal Boards, throughout the

state, vide Circular dated 25-1-1998, the Director Local Bodies

invited applications from those Junior Engineers, who were working

on daily wages basis and had completed more than two years of

service as on 31-11-1997, and were still working. The applications

were invited for the purpose of screening such Junior Engineers and

for the regularisation of their services. Since, the petitioner was

eligible, his name was sent to the Screening Committee.

Subsequently, the Screening Committee called him for interview on

6-3-1998. After a lapse of four and a half years, vide order dated 25-

10-2002, the Screening Committee declared that out of 116

candidates, it found only three candidates eligible for regularisation.

Since, the petitioner is aggrieved by the said order, he has knocked

on the doors of this Court.

4.

Like the petitioner, other Junior Engineers had also challenged

the same impugned order, through different writ petitions, before this

Court. In the case of Dara Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.8316/2002, decided on 11-6-2004, this court had

quashed and set aside the order dated 25-10-2002 and directed that

the petitioners, therein, should be regularised in the service. Since

the State was aggrieved by the said order, the State had filed a

Special Appeal before the Division Bench. However, the said appeal

was dismissed by the Division Bench.

5.

Subsequently, another coordinate Bench of this Court has

directed for regularisation of the service of the petitioner, in the case

of Shiv Narain Pal Vs. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.1299/2003, decided on 18-5-2006. The said order was challenged

by filing Special Appeal No.6310/2006, State of Rajasthan Vs. Shiv

Narain Pal. But, the Division Bench dismissed the said appeal vide

order dated 4-1-2007. The said orders were challenged before the

Apex Court by filing a SLP. The Apex Court also dismissed the said

Special Leave to Appeal vide order dated 24-9-2007.

6.

Subsequently, other coordinate Benches of this Court allowed

the writ petitions of Junior Engineers and directed the State to

regularise their services.

7.

Relying on the various orders of coordinate Benches of this

Court, and of the Apex Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner,

has contended that the petitioner is regularly working on the post of

Junior Engineer (Civil) since 1995, therefore, he deserves