A contractor's employee - there was no employer - employee relationship - no interim order restraining to appoiint fresh contract complyee

 A contractor's employee - there was no employer - employee relationship - no interim order restraining to appoiint fresh contract complyee

 a   contractor’s   employee   and   there   was   no employer­employee relationship between the original writ petitioner and the appellant Corporation.  It is submitted that even there is no regular   sanctioned   post   of   Computer   Operator   in   the   appellant Corporation and, therefore, the appellant Corporation gave the work order to the contractor for providing the services of the Computer Operator etc., the High Court ought not to have passed such an interim order.  Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties, we are of the opinion that the High Court has committed   a   grave   error   in   passing   such   an   interim   order restraining the appellant Corporation from appointing new set of contractual employees in place of original writ petitioners.     No reasons, whatsoever have been assigned by the High Court while passing the impugned interim order.  The High Court has failed to appreciate and consider the fact that according to the appellant Corporation, there was no regular sanctioned post of Computer Operator   in   the   appellant   Corporation   and   that   there   was   no employer­employee relationship between the original writ petitioner and the appellant Corporation and that the original writ petitioner was a employee appointed by the contractor on contractual basis and worked with the appellant Corporation on contractual basis. 5 As the writ petition is pending before the High Court, we refrain ourselves   from   making   any   further   observations   on   merits. However, we are of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case narrated hereinabove, the High Court ought not to have passed   such   an   interim   order.     Under   the   circumstances,   the impugned interim order passed by the High Court requires to be quashed and set aside.

1

NON­REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3489 OF 2020

[Arising out of SLP (C) No. 95 of 2020]

Rajasthan State Road Development and

Construction Corporation Ltd. .. Appellant

Versus

Piyush Kant Sharma & Ors. .. Respondents

O R D E R

M. R. Shah, J.

Leave granted.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned interim

Order dated 23.09.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature for

Rajasthan at Jaipur in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1924 of 2019, the

original   respondent   ­   Rajasthan   State   Road   Development   and

Construction Corporation Ltd. has preferred the present appeal.

3. That the respondent No. 1 herein was appointed as Computer

Operator   on   contractual   basis.     Respondent   No.   1   –   original

2

petitioner filed the writ petition before the High Court for grant of

regular pay­scale and to regularize his services on the ground that

he is serving the appellant Corporation for the last three years.   It

was the specific case on behalf of the appellant Corporation that

respondent No. 1 was never appointed by the appellant Corporation

and   there   was   no   employer­employee   relationship   between

respondent No. 1 and the appellant Corporation.  It was the specific

case on behalf of the appellant Corporation that the original writ

petitioner was hired through one M/s Sahara Supreme Security

Service, Jaipur.   It was also the case on behalf of the appellant

Corporation   that   even   there   was   no   regular   sanctioned   post   of

Computer Operator existed in the appellant Corporation.   That,

during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, another e­tender

was issued by the appellant Corporation for hiring the Computer

Operators etc. and the contract was awarded to one firm, namely,

M/s Rakshak Security (P) Ltd. for providing Computer Operators

and other posts for a period of 12 months.  That, thereafter, by the

impugned   interim   order   dated   23.09.2019,   the   High   Court   has

3

restrained the appellant Corporation from appointing new set of

contractual employees in place of the original writ petitioner.   

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned interim

order passed by the High Court, the original respondent No. 1 –

Corporation has preferred the present appeal. 

5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respective parties at length.  

5.1 Learned   counsel   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   original   writ

petitioner   has   submitted   that   considering   the   fact   that   other

similarly situated Computer Operators were continued and there

was a requirement of Computer Operator and, therefore, the High

Court is justified in passing the impugned interim order.  

5.2 On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the appellant Corporation that, as such, no

reasons have been assigned by the High Court while passing the

impugned interim order.   It is submitted that in fact the original

writ   petitioner   was   a   contractor’s   employee   and   there   was   no

employer­employee relationship between the original writ petitioner

and the appellant Corporation.  It is submitted that even there is no

4

regular   sanctioned   post   of   Computer   Operator   in   the   appellant

Corporation and, therefore, the appellant Corporation gave the work

order to the contractor for providing the services of the Computer

Operator etc., the High Court ought not to have passed such an

interim order.

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respective parties, we are of the opinion that the High Court has

committed   a   grave   error   in   passing   such   an   interim   order

restraining the appellant Corporation from appointing new set of

contractual employees in place of original writ petitioners.     No

reasons, whatsoever have been assigned by the High Court while

passing the impugned interim order.  The High Court has failed to

appreciate and consider the fact that according to the appellant

Corporation, there was no regular sanctioned post of Computer

Operator   in   the   appellant   Corporation   and   that   there   was   no

employer­employee relationship between the original writ petitioner

and the appellant Corporation and that the original writ petitioner

was a employee appointed by the contractor on contractual basis

and worked with the appellant Corporation on contractual basis.

5

As the writ petition is pending before the High Court, we refrain

ourselves   from   making   any   further   observations   on   merits.

However, we are of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances

of the case narrated hereinabove, the High Court ought not to have

passed   such   an   interim   order.     Under   the   circumstances,   the

impugned interim order passed by the High Court requires to be

quashed and set aside.

7. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the

present appeal is allowed and the impugned interim order passed

by the High Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1924 of 2019

restraining the appellant Corporation from appointing new set of

contractual employees in place of the original writ petitioners is

hereby quashed and set aside.   No costs.

……………………………J.

(ASHOK BHUSHAN)

……………………………J.

(R. SUBHASH REDDY)

……………………………J.

(M. R. SHAH)

New Delhi,

October 15, 2020