Tej Bahadur Thapa v. The Hry. State Co-Op Apex Bank Limited

CWP No.5021 of 2000(O&M) -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 21.03.2025 CWP No.5021 of 2000(O&M) Tej BahadurThapa ....Petitioner vs.

The Haryana State Co-operative Apex Bank Limited ....Respondent CWP No. 12939 of 2000(O&M) Harish Chander ....Petitioner vs.

The Haryana State Co-operative Apex Bank Limited and others ....Respondents CWP No. 7447 of 2002 (O&M) Harish Chander ....Petitioner vs.

State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CWP No. 14575 of 2000(O&M) Rajesh Gupta ....Petitioner vs.

The Haryana State Co-operative Apex Bank Limited and others ....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:

Mr. Rai Singh Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP- 5021 of 2000

CWP No.5021 of 2000(O&M) -2Mr. R.K.Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP- 12939 of 2000 Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP- 14575 of 2000 Mr. Deepak Malik, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP- 7447 of 2002 Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate and Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate for the respondent-Bank Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. A.G., Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

By this common order, CWP No. 5021 of 2000, CWP- 12939 of 2000, CWP- 14575 of 2000 and CWP- 7447 of 2002 are hereby adjudicated as common questions of law and facts are involved. With the consent of both sides, facts are borrowed from CWP No. 5021 of 2000. 2.

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 08.03.2000 (Annexure P-8) whereby respondent-bank has ordered to de-regularize his services.

3.

A Division Bench of this Court while issuing notice of motion on 03.05.2000 passed the following order:- " C.M. Misc. Allowed as prayed.

Petitioner was employed as a Peon on 16.5.1992 for a period of 89 days. He was granted extension from time to time. However, no extension was granted to the petitioner beyond 13.8.1994. He raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court, Union Territory, Chandigarh. The reference was decided in his

CWP No.5021 of 2000(O&M) -3favour and he was ordered to be reinstated with continuity of service with Rs.15,000/- as back wages by way of compensation. The petitioner was taken back in service on 29.5.1998 in pursuance to the orders of the Labour Court and thereafter his services were regularised. Now by an order dated 10.3.2000 passed by the Managing Director his services have been deregularised holding that he is not entitled to have his services regularised in view of the Government instructions. Petitioner places reliance on the instructions dated 18.3.1996 Annexure P-9 with the petition. A perusal of these instructions would show that an employee who has completed three years of ad-hoc service as on 31.1.1996 is entitled to have his services regularised. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner falls within the ambit of those Government instructions.

Notice of motion for 21.08.2000.

Operation of the impugned order Annexure P-8 will remain stayed."

4.

Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate submits that petitioners were no doubt de-regularized, however, they were subsequently regularized as per Policy of 2003 and they are working as regular employees. 5.

The petitioners prior to 2003 worked as regular employees in view of interim order of this Court and thereafter they were regularized as per Policy of 2003, meaning thereby, for all intent and purposes they have served as regular employees since the date of their regularisation at the first instance.

6.

A period of more than two and a half decade from the date of their regularization has passed away and the petitioners have further been

CWP No.5021 of 2000(O&M) -4regularized during the pendency of instant petitions as per policy of 2003, thus, no further order is warranted. The order dated 03.05.2000 is hereby made absolute.

7.

Petitions stand disposed of.

8.

Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 21.03.2025 paramjit Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

No