GENERAL MANAGER, UTTARANCHAL JAL SANSTHAN versus LAXMI DEVI AND OTHERS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 9 S.C.R. 791 "' -+ GENERAL MANAGER, UTTARANCHAL JAL SANSTHAN A v. LAXMI DEVI AND OTHERS. (Civil Appeal No. 3605 of 2009) MAY 15, 2009 B [5.8. SINHA AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.] ~ Service Law: Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Govenment c Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 ., "Β· 2 (a) (iii) and 5 - Daily wage employees - Death of, while in service - Claim for compassionate appointment - . Held: Daily wage employees' are not covered in the definition of 'Government employees' - Rendition of service for a long D ,.. " time does not confer permanency - Deceased employees were neither in permanent cadre nor were they appointed on a temporary basis - Judgments of High Court directing the department to consider the claims of writ petitioners for compassionate appointments set aside. E Constitution of India, 1950 'f Articles 14 and 16 - Appointment on a regular vacancy , - Held: A regular vacancy cannot be filled up except in terms of recruitment rules as also on compliance of the F constitutional scheme of Enquality - Article 14 carries with it a positive effect - Equality clause cannot apply in a case of illegality - A circular cannot prevail over statutory rules - Uttar. Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying In Harness Rules, 197 4 - Uttaranchal Public Works I ,,--I G' β’ Department circular. dated 21.3.2002 . Judgment: Retrospective operation of judgment - Held: JudiCial .. 791 H 792 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 9 S.C.R. A decisions unless otherwise specified, are retrospective in operation. The husband of the respondent in Civil Appeal No. 3065 of 2009 and the father of the respondent Β·in Civil 8 Appeal No. 3606 of 2009 worked on daily wage basis in U.P. Jal Sansthan. They were transferred to Kumaun Jal Sansthan on 16.4~1991 and 1.10.1990 respectively. They died in such service. The respond,ents made representations for compassionate appointment which was declined by the Department. However, the High C Court directed to consider their cases for appointment. Aggrieved, the Department filed the appeals. Β· It was contended for the respondents thatJn view of Clause (3) of r.2 (a) of the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents D of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 197 4, the deceased employees having rendered more than 3 years continue service were Government servants and, further the Uttaranchal Public Works Department Circular dated 21.3.2002 provided for compassionate E appointments on daily wage to dependents of such daily rated workers who had rendered 10 years of such service prior to their death while in service. Allowing the appeals, the Court held: F HELD: 1.1~ Daily wage employees are not covered in the definition of Government employees and, therefore, in their case question of applicability of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 197 4 does not arise. Before a G person can claim status of a Government servant, not only his appointment must be made in terms of the recruitment rules, but he must also otherwise fulfill the criterion therefor. Appointment made in violation of the constitutional scheme is a nullity. Rendition of service for H a long time does not confer permanency. It is furthermore y t GENERALMANAGER,UTTARANCHALJALSANSTHANv. 793 LAXMI DEVI AND ORS. not a mode of appointment. [Para 24, 27 and 28] [807-G- A H; 808-F-H] 1.2. Indisputably having regard to the equality clause contained in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, whether the appointment is in a regular vacancy or 8 not is essentially a qusetion of fact. Existence of a regular vacancy would mean a vacancy which occurred in a post sanctioned by the competent authority. For the said purpose, the cadre strength of the category to which the post belongs is required to be taken into consideration. c A regular vacancy is which arises within the cadre strength. It is a trite law that a regular vacancy cannot be filled up except in terms of the recruitment rules as also upon compliance of the constitutional scheme of equality. [Para 16] [801-F-H; 802-A] 0 Secretary, State of Kamataka vs. Uma Devi (3) 2006 (4) SCC 1; Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Workmen 2007 (1) SCC 408; National Institute of Technology vs. Niraj Kumar Singh 2007 (2) SCC 481; I. G. (Karmik) vs. Prahalad Mani Tripathi 2007 (6) SCC 162; State Bank of I
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.
Lex