MUKESH BHAI CHHOTABHAI PATEL  

v.  JOINT AGRICULTURE AND MARKETING ADVISOR,  

GOVT. OF INDIA AND ORS.  

AUGUST 18, 1994  

[K. RAMASWAMY AND N.P. SINGH, JJ.]  

SeT11ice Law-Temporary appointmenr-Scheme for regularisation of- Conditions of applicability-Held inapplicable to employee who has not  

A  

B  

passed the qualifying test. C  

The appellant was appointed on May 21, 1977 but was removed from  service subsequently. He unsuccessfully challenged his removal before the  Tribunal. In appeal to this Court it was contended on his behalf that in  view of the scheme framed by the Union of India vide its Circular No.  19/S~/80-Estt. I dated 8.6.84, which prescribed that all persons appointed D  temporarily to Group C posts on or prior to November 4, 1978 should be  regularised, the appellant was entitled to regularisation; a proper con- struction of the circular would show that failure of the appellant to pass  the test is not a ground to deny him regularisation.  

Dismissing the appeal, this Court  

HELD : Regularisation has to be considered in the light of the  scheme framed by the Department. It is not an automatic regularisation.  A reading of the Circular clearly indicates that the question of regularisa·  

E  

tioo bas to be done by a committee duly constituted for regularisation of p  the persons appointed temporarily to Group C posts. Admittedly, the  appellant did not pass the qualifying test conducted by the competent  commltte. Therefore, he could not be regularised. Thus, there is no il- legality lo the order passed by the Tribunal. [761-E, C-D]  

Bhagwati Prasad v. Delhi State Mineral Develoment Corporation, G  [1990] 1 S.C.C. 361, cited.  

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5713 of  1994.  

From the Judgment and Order dated 19.4.90 of the Central Ad- H  759

760 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.  

A ministrative Tribunal, Additional Bench at New Bombay in O.A. No. 368  of 1987.  

B.K. Mehta, Ms. Divya Bahal, Ms. Meeta Sharma and B.V. Desai for  the Appellant.  

B K.N. shukla, Avtar Singh Rawat and S.N. Terdol for the Respon-

c  

D  

dents.  

The following Order of the Court was delivered :  

Leave granted.  

The appellant was appointed on May 21, 1977 and was removed on  April 13, 1987. When the appellant approached the Tribunal, the Tribunal  in the impugned order dated April 19, 1990 made in O.A. No. 368/87  cjismissing the petition. Thus this appeal by special leave.  

Shri Mehta, learned senior counsel for the appellant placing heavy  reliance on the decision of this Court in Bhagwati Prasad v. Delhi State  Mineral Development Corporation, [1990] 1 SCC 361, contended that the  Union of India, Ministry of Irrigation had issued the circular No. 19/50/80- Estt. I, dated 8.6.1984, directing that all those candidates temporarily  

E appointed on or prior to November 4, 1978 should be regularised and that  the question of the appellant appearing for the test asked for by the  Department and his nonclearance should not be a ground to deny him  regularisation of his temporary appointment on the proper construction of  the above circular, it is clear that he is entitled to that relief. Therefore,  

F  

G  

H  

the Tribunal has committed gravious error in dismissing the appellat's O.A.  

The said circular reads as under :  

"Sub : Regularisation of appointmnets made by CWC to the grade  of LDCs/Steno prior to taking over of recruitment by the S.S.C.  

Sir,  

I am directed to refer to the correspondence rusting with the  CWC letter No.8/11012/2/82-E.VII dated 19th Jan' 89, on the above  subject and to say that it has been decided with the approval of  DPAR, that all ad-hoc appointments made in the grade of

MUKESH BHAI BHAIPATEL. v. IT. AGRICULTURE A~1D MRKTG. ADVJSOR761  

LDCs/Stenos prior to 4.11.1978 may be regularised as a special A  case. The DPAR vide their OM No. 24012/41/78-Estt.(B) dated  4-11-1978 and made it mandatory for every Deptt. that recruitment  to Group 'C' posts in the attached and sub-offices should be made  only through the SSC. Hence 4.11.1978 has been fixed, as the  cut-off date for regularisaing the adhoc appointment in the grade B  of LDCs/stenos.  

2. I am to request that necessary action may now be taken imme- diately under intimation to all concerned."  

A reading of it clearly indicates that the Government have approved C  the proposal made by the DPAR that all adhoc appointments made in the  grade of LDCs/Stenos prior to November 4, 1978 be regularised as special  case. It is also made mandatory for every department that the recruitment  to group 'C' posts in the attached sub-offices should be made only through  S.S.C. thereafter. In that context, November 4, 1978 has been fixed as a  cut-off date for regularisation of adhoc appointments in the grade of D  LDCs/Stenos. It ts clear that the question of regularisation has to be done  by a committee duly constituted for regularisation of the persons appointed  temporarily to Group C posts, namely, LDCs/Stenos. Admittedly, the  appellant had appeared thrice. It is stated that on one occasion the result  was not declared. Admittedly on two occasions results were declared and E  he did not pass the qualifying test conducted by the competent committee.  Therefore, he could not be regularised. Regularisation in that context has  to be considered in the light of the scheme framed by the Department. It  is not an automatic regularisation as contended for. Under these cir- cumstances, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the  Tribunal. F  

The appeal is accordingly dismissed No Cost.  

T.N.A. Appeal dismissed.