1997 JTR(SC) 655
1997 4 JT 724 ; 1997 3 Scale 674 ; 1997 5 SCC 86 ; 1997 SCC(L&S) 1119 ; 1997 SCC(L&S) 119 ; 1997 3 SCR 688 ; 1997 3 SCT 460 ; 1997 4 SLR 15 ; 1997 KHC 3604 ; 1997 4 Supreme 233
1997(4) Supreme 233
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.
Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, M.P. -Appellant
versus
Bal Kishan Soni & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 2888 of 1997
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 25136 of 1996)
Decided on 7-4-1997
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : G.C. Gupta, Sr. Adv., S.K. Bandhyopadhyay, and C.L. Sahu, Advocates.
For the Respondents : T.G. Narayanan Nair, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Where posts in a project were co-terminus with the scheme there can not be a direction to regularise the service.
Act Referred :SERVICE LAW : .
(A) The Scheme sponsored by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, being a temporary project, does not permit the creation of permanent posts; consequently, any direction to regularize service is inconsistent with the statutory framework governing post-tenure and service conditions under the relevant Service Law.
(B) The core legal principles include that posts under a scheme are co-terminus with the scheme, and upon abolition or non-availability of the scheme, such posts stand abolished; the remedy is limited to payment of scale of pay for work done without guaranteeing regularized service.
Facts of the case:
The appellant-institute created 625 posts under a scheme sponsored by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. The respondents were working as Binders, Machine Operators and Class IV employees on regular pay-scales and filed a writ petition for regularization of service. The High Court allowed the writ petition. The appellant-institute filed this appeal by special leave.
Findings of Court:
The Scheme is temporary and permanent posts cannot be created; on abolition of the Scheme, posts stand necessarily abolished; directions to regularize services violate the right to posts, though payment at the scale of the post is mandated.
Issues:
Whether directions to regularize service under a temporary scheme-sponsored project are permissible; whether the High Court can order regularization when posts are inherently tied to the Scheme's duration.
Ratio Decidendi:
Since the Scheme is temporary and posts are co-terminus, regularization cannot be ordered; however, employees are entitled to the scale of pay for the work performed under the Scheme.
Result:
The appeal is allowed in part; the High Court order is modified to direct payment of the scale of pay for the posts worked, without directing regularization of service.
(A) The Scheme sponsored by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, being a temporary project, does not permit the creation of permanent posts; consequently, any direction to regularize service is inconsistent with the statutory framework governing post-tenure and service conditions under the relevant Service Law.
(B) The core legal principles include that posts under a scheme are co-terminus with the scheme, and upon abolition or non-availability of the scheme, such posts stand abolished; the remedy is limited to payment of scale of pay for work done without guaranteeing regularized service.
Facts of the case:
The appellant-institute created 625 posts under a scheme sponsored by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. The respondents were working as Binders, Machine Operators and Class IV employees on regular pay-scales and filed a writ petition for regularization of service. The High Court allowed the writ petition. The appellant-institute filed this appeal by special leave.
Findings of Court:
The Scheme is temporary and permanent posts cannot be created; on abolition of the Scheme, posts stand necessarily abolished; directions to regularize services violate the right to posts, though payment at the scale of the post is mandated.
Issues:
Whether directions to regularize service under a temporary scheme-sponsored project are permissible; whether the High Court can order regularization when posts are inherently tied to the Scheme's duration.
Ratio Decidendi:
Since the Scheme is temporary and posts are co-terminus, regularization cannot be ordered; however, employees are entitled to the scale of pay for the work performed under the Scheme.
Result:
The appeal is allowed in part; the High Court order is modified to direct payment of the scale of pay for the posts worked, without directing regularization of service.
ORDER
Leave granted.
2. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh passed in Misc. Petition No. 2935 of 1986 on 9th February, 1995 and the order passed in Review Petition (MCC No. 461 of 1995) dated 12th July, 1996. On a Scheme sponsored by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, the appellant-institute had taken up the Project. As many as 625 posts were created in different scales. The respondents while working as Binders, Machine Operators & Class IV employees respectively in the regular pay-scales of Rs. 750-945, filed a writ petition in the High Court for regularisation of their service. By the impugned order, the High Court allowed the writ petition. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant-institute has filed this appeal by special leave.
3. It is not in dispute that the Scheme is sponsored by Indian Council of Agricultural Research and, therefore, permanent posts cannot be created. The posts are co-terminus with the scheme. On abolition of the Scheme, posts also necessarily stand abolished. We are informed that the Scheme may continue to be in force; but it depends upon the Scheme being sponsored and the posts made available by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. Therefore, the direction to regularise the services is violative of their right to posts. The order of the High Court to that extent is modified. On whatever posts the respondents are working and discharging their duty, the scale of pay of the said post is directed to be paid.
4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
Appeal disposed of.
*******