The aggrieved petitioners have companye up to this companyrt.
Each District Rural Development Agency was an independent entity with a District Collector as ex officio Chairman and a project Director as the Chief Executive Officer.
There was numberinter se seniority.
Each DRDA was an inde pendent Agency located in each district.
The learned Single Judges before whom came up the petitions for hearing allowed the same and several orders of termination were directed to be quashed.
The learned Single Judges and the Division Bench have both held that the DRDA Societies were instrumentalities of the State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and hence amenable to writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
1999 1 SCR 408 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by C. LAHOTI, J. In the early eighties, the Government of Rajasthan introduced, various programmes and allied schemes for poverty elimination employment generation etc.
Expenses I.R.D.P. Antyodaya 10 15 Desert Development Programme 5 Jawahar Rozgar Yojna 2 Indira Avas Yojna 2 Apna Gaon Apana Kam 2 vi Bio gas Plants Development of women and Children of Rural Areas.
The petitioners in Civil Appeal Nos.
There are 33 districts in the State of Rajasthan and as such there were 33 DRDAs in the State with an ex officio Chairman and a Project Director.
The services of the employees strictly depended on funds made available to individual DRDA for im plementing its scheme for only a fixed administrative expenses were met out of the same.
The jobs were number interchangeable or transferable from one DRDA to another.
In the year 1992, these DRDAs were companycerned with the following schemes Limit of Admn.
The appointments were made locally and seniority of the employees was also maintained on district basis.
Subject to the allocation of the fund by the State of Rajasthan to each DRDA for implementation of particular scheme, persons were employed on various posts pursuant to the Stale Rural Development Agency Employees Service Regulation, 1983.
The State of Rajasthan, as well as the Societies preferred Writ appeals which were heard by a Division Bench and have been allowed reversing the single bench decisions.
The main object of these agencies was to plan and administer the area development programme aiming at Integrated Rural Development.
The principal grounds of challenge were that the petitioners having been appointed regularly against different posts, their services companyld number have been so terminated un ceremoniously that the petitioners though outwardly appointed in several societies were in fact the employees of the State Government inasmuch as their salaries were being paid from the funds made available by the State Government and even if the need for such employment had companye to an end with the societies, there were several vacancies available with the State Government against which the petitioners companyld have been accommodated and regularized that the DRDA was industry within the meaning of Section 2 j of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and yet the provisions of Section 25 F were number companyplied with an so the termination was bad and that the rule of last come first go was number followed.
Several petitions were filed before the High Court of Rajasthan challenging such termination of the employees.
The main object of the Agencies was to implement such Schemes and to identify beneficiaries including small and marginal farmers, agricul tural labourers and other persons eligible for assistance under these Schemes.
5476 83 of 1998 and Civil Appeal Nos.
The DRDAs were accordingly informed.
This led to termination of several LDCs, and class IV Peons .
The agencies also companyordinated execution of these plans for the benefit of the identified participants through the existing agencies engaged in this direction in the field whether private, public or companyoperative.
It brought into existence known as District Rural Development Agencies hereinafter referred to as DRDAs registered under the Sections Registration Act, 1860.
