STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, THROUGH THE SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE GOVT. OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLAversusASHWANI KUMAR AND ORS.
- Citation
- 1996 INSC 14
- Decided
- 3 January 1996
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
No vested right is created by temporary employment and courts cannot order regularisation or creation of posts where no vacancy exists.
Summary
The respondents were daily‑wage workers engaged on a muster‑roll under a Central Government scheme in Himachal Pradesh. After the project was completed and closed due to lack of funds, they were dismissed. They filed a writ petition in the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which issued an interim direction ordering their re‑engagement elsewhere and later disposed of the petition. On special leave, the State appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court held that temporary employment does not create any vested right of continued service, and a court cannot direct the regularisation of such employees or the creation of posts where no vacancy exists. Consequently, the High Court’s direction was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a temporary or daily‑wage employee acquires a vested right to continued service after the project for which he was engaged is closed.
- Whether a court can direct the regularisation or creation of posts for such employees in the absence of any vacancy.
- Scope of judicial intervention in service matters under Articles 226 and 136 of the Constitution.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of Indias. Article 136, s. Article 226
Subjects
Judgment
. -(
A STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, THROUGH
THE SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE GOVT. OF ,.
HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
v.
ASHWANI KUMAR AND ORS.
B JANUARY 3, 1996
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.]
Constitution of India, 1950:
c Articles 226, 136-Daily wagers on muster roll--l'aidfromfunds pro-
vided by Central Government project completed and closed due to non-avail-
ability offunds-Services dispensed with-Writ Petition-High Court order-
ing re-engagement <if the employees-On appeal held: no vested right is ere-
ated on temporary employment-Non-availability of vacancies-Courts to
adopt pragmatic approach-Regularisation/Creation of posts cannot be
D direcied--Service Law-Regularisation.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1538of1996.
From the Judgment and Order daled 9.3.93 of the Himachal Pradesh
High Court in C. WP. No. 18 of 1992.
E
B. Dutta and Naresh K. Sharma for the appellant.
Devendra Singh for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 'r
F Leave granted.
Heard Counsel on both sides.
The facts are that the respondent was engaged on daily wages on muster
roll basis in Central Scheme and were paid out of the funds provided by the
G Central Government. It is stated that after the scheme was closed their services
were dispensed with. When the respondents filed the writ petition in the High
Court, the High Court gave interim direction dated 6th January, 1993 and di-
rected them to be re-engaged else where, Pursuant to the interim direction the
writ petition came to be disposed of on March 9, 1993. Thus this appeal by
H special leave.
56
STATE Or H.P. v. ASHWANI KUMAR 57
It is seen that when the project is completed and closed due to non- A
availability of funds, consequently, the employees have to go along with the
Closed project. The High Court was not right in giving the direction to regu-
larise them or to continue them in other places. No vested right is created in
temporary employment. Directions cannot be given to regularise their serv-
ices in the absence of any existing vacancies nor directions be gi vcn to create
B
posts by the State to a non-existent establishment. The Court would adopt
pragmatic approach in giving directions. The directions would amount to cre-
ating of posts and continuing them in spite of non-availability of the work. We
are of considered view that the directions issued by the High Court are abso-
lutely illegal warranting our interference. The order of the High Court is set
side. c
The appeal is allowed. No Costs.
G.N. Appeals allowed.
""·
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.