V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J):
1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants.
2. M.A. No.1624/2014 filed under Rule 4(5)(a) of C.A.T. (Procedure) Rules, 1987 for joining together, is allowed.
3. In the present original application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants have sought issuance of directions to the respondents to regularize their services by formulating one time policy in view of the judgments of the Honble High Court and Honble Supreme Court and further by considering the decisions of the other States, which have regularized the services of the contractual employees.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the respondents appointed the applicants as Staff Nurse in G.T.B., Dilshad Garden, Delhi on contract basis and have been continuing in such capacity for quite long. According to him, the initial appointment of the applicants was based on an interview. He submitted that once the Government of Jammu and Kashmir could take a decision to regularize the services of its contractual employees by creating additional posts, the respondents herein should also follow the pursuit. In support of his claim, learned counsel for applicants relied upon the Jammu and Kashmir Governments Gazette Notification issued on 29.4.2010 and the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi in All India Institute of Medical Sciences v. Shobha Kandpal (W.P. (C) No.278/2013) decided on 17.1.2013.
5. We find from the averments made in the original application that the representation dated 30.04.2014 preferred by the applicants espousing their grievances before the respondents has not yet been decided.
6. The Honble High Court of Delhi in its judgment dated 6.11.2013 in W.P.[C] No. 6798/2002 Sonia Gandhi and Ors vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.(supra) considered the various issues pertaining to the contract employees working under the control of the respondents [Govt. of NCTD] including their continuance and regularization. The Honble High Court, in Sonia Gandhis case (supra), after duly considering the Constitution Bench Judgment of the Honble Apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1, held as under:-
17. On the subject of regularization the undisputed position which emerges is that over the last two decades i.e. 20 years the Government of NCT of Delhi has not assessed the man power requirement in its various departments and offices resulting in large scale contract appointment being resorted to.
xx xx xx xxxx
22. Accordingly, we issue another direction and simultaneously dispose of the two writ petitions. The direction would be that the Government of NCT Delhi would carry out a manpower requirement assessment in all its departments keeping in view the fact that the population in Delhi has crossed 1.7 crore persons. Such number of posts shall be sanctioned as are necessary to provide services to the citizens of Delhi. A one time policy of regularization shall be framed and existing rules pertaining to service in different departments shall be amended. Existing contractual employees shall be considered for appointment to these new posts as per a policy framed.
xx xx xx xx
25. To summarize, the writ petitions stand disposed of issuing directions as per paragraphs 13, 16 and 22 above.
26. No costs.
7. The Honble High Court of Delhi vide its order dated 2.5.2014 in Review Petition Nos. 198/2014 and 202/2014, while upholding the aforesaid order in Sonia Gandhi Case (supra), clarified the same as follows:-
5. It is apparent that our decision would relate to contract appointments concerning institutions established by the Government of Delhi. They would obviously not embrace such projects which are executed by the Government of NCT of Delhi under the centrally funded schemes.
8. In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the Original Application with a direction to respondent No.1-Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi to take a decision in the aforementioned representation dated 30.04.2014 (colly.), in terms of the judgment of the Honble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sonia Gandhi (supra), as clarified, vide its order dated 2.5.2014 in Review Petition Nos.198/2014 and 202/2014 (supra) within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till then, the services of the applicants shall not be discontinued.
9. The Original Application stands disposed of. No order as to costs.