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

2007 Supreme(SC) 1555

A.K. Mathur & Markandey Katju
Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club & Anr. - PETITIONER
Versus
Chander Hass & Anr. - RESPONDENT
Appeal (civil) 5732 of 2007
[Arising out of S.L.P(C) No.3358 of 2007]
Decided On : 06/12/2007

Headnote:Service Law-Regularisation-Plaintiffs (Respondents in this appeal) appointed as Mali (gardner) - They were told to perform duties of tractor drivers, though there was no sanctioned post of tractor driver in the employer's establishment-High Court directed defendants to get the post of tractor driver sanctioned and regularise the plaintiffs on that post-Court cannot direct creation of posts-Judgment and order of High Court held completely beyond jurisdiction. (Paras 14 to 16)

       Constitution of India-Articles-226, 30 and 50-Judicial activism-Judges should never be 'activist'-It should be resorted to only in exceptional circumstances when the situation forcefully demands in the interest of nation or the poorer and weaker sections of society but always keeping in mind that ordinarily the task of legislation or administrative decisions is for the legislature and executive and not the judiciary - If there is a law; Judges can certainly enforce it, but Judges cannot create a law and seek to enforce it. (Paras 26 and 27)

       (2007)1 SCC 408, JT 2007(10)4 SC 272, AIR 1996 SC 11, AIR 1955 SC 549, AIR 1989 SC 1899, AIR 1992 SC 96, JT 2006(2) SC 361, AIR 2006 SC 767, JT 2007(10)4 SCC 509, 198 US 45 (1905), 381 US 479, 347 US 483 (1954), 348 US 436, 410 US 113-Referred to.

O R D E R

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Leave granted.

3. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 17th February, 2006 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in R.S.A. No.666/2006 whereby the learned Single Judge has affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court.

4. The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the present appeal are that the plaintiffs (respondents in this appeal) were appointed as Mali (gardener) in the service of the defendant-appellant, which is a golf club run by the Haryana Tourism Corporation in the year 1989 and 1988 respectively on daily wages. Subsequently in the year 1989 they were told to perform the duties of Tractor Drivers, though there was no post of tractor driver in the employer s establishment. However for a number of years they continued to be paid wages for the post of Mali.

5. Thereafter on a recommendation made by the Head Office, the appellants started paying them wages of tractor driver on daily wage basis, as per rates recommended by the Deputy Commissioner. Though they continued to work for about a decade as tractor drivers, their services were regularized against the post of Mali in the year 1999 and not as tractor driver. When despite representations their grievance was not redressed, the respondents herein filed civil suit in the month of April, 2001 claiming regularization against the posts of tractor driver. Their claim was rejected by the Trial Court which observed that there was no post of tractor driver in the establishment, and the suit was dismissed. The Trial Court held that plying a tractor is part and parcel of the job of Mali in a Golf Club, since the Golf Field of the Club is vast and needs to be maintained with mechanical gadgets.

6. Aggrieved against the said order of dismissal of the suit, the respondents herein preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Faridabad. Their appeal was accepted and the judgment and decree of the Trial Court was set aside. The First Appellate Court observed that the defendants were taking the work of tractor driver from the plaintiffs since 13.8.1999, and hence it directed the defendants to get the post of tractor driver sanctioned, and to regularize the plaintiffs on that post.

7. Thereafter the Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club filed a second appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The learned Single Judge held that the post of tractor driver should be created as there is no hitch in not creating the posts of drivers especially when tractors were available and there existed need to use those tractors. It was also observed by the learned Single Judge that simply by relying upon technicalities the State authorities cannot be allowed to suppress the individuals and to deny their lawful rights. The learned Single Judge also held that no substantial question of law arose in the matter. Hence, the second appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the First Appellate Court was upheld. Aggrieved against the said judgment of the learned Single Judge, the appellants are in appeal before us.

8. The plaintiff-respondents admitted in the plaint that they were appointed as Mali. In the suit the plaintiff-respondents stated that they were working as tractor driver at Aravali Golf Club. Initially they were engaged on daily wages. Thereafter their services were regularized on the post of Mali (gardener) instead of tractor driver. The respondents filed a representation before the concerned authorities for regularizing them on the post of Tractor Driver, but that was not done since there was no post of tractor driver. Therefore, the respondents filed a suit.

9. The suit was contested by the defendants-appellants. The appellants in their writt















































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