Full Judgment
Writ Petition No.22119/2013.
2.1.2014.
Shri Narendra Sharma, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for the State of M.P.on advance notice.
Heard.
PetitioneRs.engaged as peon in Higher Secondary School, have filed this petition seeking direction to the respondents to grant backwages for the period from 1.5.2000 to 29.2.2004 with all consequential benefits.
Facts giving rise to the claim of the petitioners briefly are that they were initially appointed in the year 1990 on daily wages.
Services of the petitioners were dispensed with w.e.f.1.5.2000.
That, in pursuance to the policy decision taken by the State Government vide Memo No.F-5-4/2003-1/3 Bhopal, dated 21.1.2004, the petitioners were reinstated vide order-dated 28.2.2004 on work-charged establishment with a specific condition that they will not be entitled for wages from 2000-2004, neither they will be entitled for seniority for the said period.
Admittedly, the petitioners did not question the order-dated 28.2.2004; however, later on, filed a Writ Petition 1354/2011(s) seeking direction for reinstatement and grant of regular pay scale and other reliefs as has been granted to the petitioners in Original Application No.128/99 (Smt.
Savitri Bai versus State of M.P.) as also in Writ Petition 4389/2003 decided on 29.10.2003.
Petition preferred by the petitioner was disposed of on 4.2.2011 in the following terms - “Keeping in view the aforesaid grievance of the petitioners and taking note of the orders passed by :: 2 :: Writ Petition No.22119/2013.
the Indore Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4389/03 and W.P.No.7018/03, the respondent No.2-District Education Officer, Sehore is directed to take action for granting similar benefits to the petitioners and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months and grant benefit to the petitioners as has been done in other districts by virtue of orders as indicated herein above.
Necessary action be taken and benefit extended to the petitioners within the aforesaid period.” That, in pursuance to the direction in writ petition, the respondent passed an order-dated 23.8.2012; whereby, the petitioners have been treated as members of contingency establishment w.e.f.1.12.1993.
Evidently, there was no direction in writ petition to grant the petitioners backwages/wages for the period from 2000-2004 when they were not in service, neither the petitioners are able to demonstrate from the order-dated 4.2.2011 passed in W.P.No.1354/2011(s) that State Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.128/99 (Smt.
Savitri Bai versus State of M.P.) and the Indore Bench of this Court in W.P.No.7018/2003 decided on 23.8.2004, has directed to pay the wages for the period from 2000-2004, when the petitioners and the like were not employed.
It is neither the case of the petitioners that against the order of disengagement, they had approached any Court wherein some protection was granted to them or that an order has been passed of granting backwages.
Admittedly, services of the petitioners who are engaged on daily wages in work charged establishment were dispensed with in the year 2000 under policy :: 3 :: Writ Petition No.22119/2013.
decision of the State Government.
Thereafter, by another policy decision by the State Government, services of the petitioners were reinstated in the year 2004.
Between the period from 2000 to 2004, they did not discharge any work.
Since the petitioners were not in service for the period from 2000-2004, they were not having lien as would entitle the petitioners for wages for the said period.
Since the petitioners were not engaged for the period from 1.5.2000 to 29.2.2004, no direction can be given to the respondents to pay wages for the said period.
In view whereof, the petition being devoid of substance is hereby dismissed.
However, no costs.
(SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE vinod