Petitioners are physically handicapped Scheduled Caste women who were employed as Sweepers cum Scavengers on a temporary basis. It is the case of the petitioners that though their appointments were made in terms of the rules by calling for applications from candidates sponsored through employment exchange and after conducting regular procedure for appointment, in the order issued it was indicated that the appointment was only for 179 days in terms of Exts.P4 and P5 which came to be challenged before this Court complaining that the intention was for appointment of the petitioners on regular basis. In fact, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the requisition given by respondents 1 and 2 was for appointment to the permanent vacancy and therefore there was no reason for having restricted the appointment to 179 days or make it on provisional basis.
2. By an interim order dated 05/12/2008, this Court had directed the District Employment Officer to produce the original W.P.C.No.18658/2007 2 requisition received from respondents 1 and 2. In fact, respondents 1 and 2 have filed along with their counter affidavit copy of the requisition stating that they had requested only for appointment of scavengers on temporary basis.
3. The learned Government Pleader has now made available the original of the said requisition from the files which also indicates that it is the same as what has been filed by respondents 1 and 2 as Annexure I. In that view of the matter, it is clear that the appointments were made on a temporary basis. Going by the dictum laid down in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi [2006 (4) SCC 1] petitioners cannot seek any benefit of regularisation. In that view of the matter, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled for any reliefs in the writ petition.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
(sd/-) (A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE) jsr W.P.C.No.18658/2007 3 W.P.C.No.18658/2007 4