Single Judge disposed of writ plea seeking regularization of Group-D posts in State Government Press. Bench held petitioners ineligible as they were not in service on Supreme Court prescribed cutoff date, dismissing petition citing earlier High Court decision. No relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10502 of 2016
Petitioner :- Ramji And 7 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anshu Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Piyush Shukla learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
This petition has been preferred seeking regularisation of the petitioners on Group-D posts in the Government Press. A challenge is also laid to a list appended at annexure-9 in terms of which the names of the petitioners have been shown as being ineligible for absorption/regularisation.
Undisputedly the issue of regularisation of daily-wage and Group-D employees in the Government Press was considered by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 3339-3340 of 2014 arising From SLP (Civil) Nos. 13340-13341 of 2010. After dealing with the rival submissions which were addressed these appeals were disposed of on 07 March 2014 with the following observations:-
"Be that as it may, in view of the position as explained above, we are of the view that the interest of justice would be met and complete justice can be done if an appropriate direction is issued to fill-up the posts in GroupD/Class-IV category in the Government Press in the State of Uttar Pradesh from amongst the daily-wage employees in service as on 12.11.1997. The Director of the Printing Press is directed to identify the vacancies between 1991 and 2003 in the Group-D/Class-IV posts other than "Gatemen". This exercise shall be completed within four months. The vacancies thus identified shall be filled-up on regular basis from amongst the daily-wage Group-D/Class-IV employees in service in the Government Press as on 12.11.1997 and who can work at least for five years as on date, before their superannuation as per Rules. The qualification shall be determined as per the 1985 Rules. This exercise shall be completed within another one month. We make it clear that in the process, none of the existing regular employees including the selected gatemen shall be disturbed. In other words, it will be open to the State to appoint such employees and post them either in the vacancies if available in the Government Press or any other Group-D/Class-IV posts in the State. We further make it clear that
without completing this exercise, there shall be no regular appointment in any Group- D/Class-IV posts in the State of Uttar Pradesh."
Undisputedly none of the petitioners here were working in the Government Press on 12 November 1997 which was the cut off date prescribed. The directions as framed by the Supreme Court itself was confined in respect of those daily wage employees who were in service of the Government Press on that date. Learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that none of the petitioners were working on the aforementioned date. Additionally the Court notes that an identical controversy was considered by a Division Bench of the Court in Special Appeal No. 169 of 2017 when similar submissions were negatived with the Division Bench observing thus:-
"Thus, it is clear that none of the appellants were found working as daily wage workers on 12.11.1997, the date that was fixed by the Supreme Court for regularization of daily wage workers who were working as on that date in the case of Moti Lal (supra). Hence, we find no merit in the appeal. Appeals are dismissed. "
The further submissions which are addressed with respect to the inclusion of certain persons who are described to be ineligible cannot possibly be gone into in this writ petition since even if it were found that certain persons were incorrectly included, no relief can be granted to the petitioner consequentially unless they establish that they were covered by the directions framed by the Supreme Court.
The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed .
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 faraz
3 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioners eligible for regularization despite not being in Government Press service on Supreme Court cutoff date of 12.11.1997.
Whether list barang showing petitioners ineligible can be challenged when they fail to show coverage by Supreme Court directions.
Whether writ petition can succeed when petitioners were not daily wage workers in service as on 12.11.1997.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
SLP (Civil) Nos. 13340-13341 of 2010Explained¶7
Civil Appeal Nos. 3339-3340 of 2014
Moti Lal [supra]Distinguished¶10
Special Appeal No. 169 of 2017
Ramji And 7 Others
State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Yashwant Varma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
