Special appeal against a writ order directing regularization of services. The court directed the State to treat the respondent at par with junior regularized staff and regularize his service until eligible.
Direction to treat petitioner at par with juniors and regularize his service if any junior is regularized.
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.
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 183 of 2014
Appellant :- State Of U.P. And Another Respondent :- Nand Lal Counsel for Appellant :- A.K. Roy S.C.,S.N. Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- D.C. Tripathi,Dinesh Kumar Misra,J.P. Guta
Hon'ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
By the judgment impugned dated 06.08.2013 learned Single Bench while disposing of Writ-A No. 31558 of 1996 directed the appellants / respondents to ensure regularization of the respondent / petitioner as regular Collection Amin from the date the persons junior to him were regularized in service. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that the respondent / petitioner was discontinued from service in the year 1996 and under the relevant service there is no provision for regularization of Seasonal Collection Amin in service. It is brought to our notice by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent / petitioner that during pendency of the petition for writ a process of regularization was initiated and completed under the order dated 11.04.2012. The candidature of the petitioner too was considered but he was not regularized only on account of pendency of the petition for writ that came to be disposed of under the judgment impugned. It is further stated that several persons junior to him were regularized by the appellant in service. Learned counsel has also shown us a copy of the order dated 11.04.2012 along with its annexure. On going through the judgment impugned it reveals that learned Single Bench has also taken into consideration the fact aforesaid while giving direction to the appellants to regularize services of the petitioner from the date the persons junior to him were regularized.
In view of this factual background, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition for writ by directing the appellants to treat the petitioner at par with his juniors who are stated to be regularized in service in the year 2012. The respondent / petitioner is also required to be regularized in service if service of any of his junior is regularized.
The appeal stands, disposed of, accordingly.
Order Date :- 17.2.2020 AS Rathor
(Samit Gopal,J.) (Govind Mathur, C.J.)
State Of U.P.
Nand Lal
Govind Mathur
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
