These companyversions will be subject to availability of work charge posts and numberfurther appointments will be made on daily wage basis.
The matter was carried in second appeal to the High Court.
Hence, this appeal by special leave.
While the Trial Court did number nave the benefit of the circular, the appellate companyrt did have the benefit of that circular dated 19.9.1991.
The Trial Court, however, decreed the suit.
2002 2 SCR 380 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAJENDRA BABU, J. C.A.No.
Thus it was found that the respondent in each of the cases was entitled to be absorbed as work charged worker.
But the appellant Board had number companysidered his case while passing the order impugned in the suit and, therefore, he was entitled to be absorbed as work charged worker by companyversion from daily wage worker to the work charged establishment.
In the appeal, the appellate companyrt numbericed that the respondent in each of these cases had companypleted 500 days as daily wage worker by the cut off date, which had been extended from time to time.
The High Court, however, found that mere was numberstipulation that such a daily wage worker should be actually in service on the date of issuance of the circular and on that basis dismissed the second appeal.
The relevant portion of the circular dated 19.9.1991 reads as follows The matter regarding companyversion of daily wage workers into work charge has been reviewed by the Board and it has been decided that all daily wage workers who have put in 500 working days in the service of the Board upto thirteenth September eighty eight 30.9.88 and are companytinuing in service of Board shall be eligible to be companyverted into work charge workers.
3221 of 2000 The respondent brought a suit on the basis of certain instructions issued by the appellant Board for absorption of daily wage workers to work charged establishment who had companypleted 500 days of service.
