HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 65943 of 2009 Petitioner :- Omkar Nath Dubey & Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Shyam Narayan Pandey Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioners are claiming regularization within the parameters of U.P. Regularization of Daily Wagers Group D Posts Rules, 2001. The key to regularization lies in the event of fulfillment of two conditions; (i) working of the incumbent prior to 29.06.1991 and (ii) continuation of the incumbents in the establishment concerned on the date of commencement of the Rules i.e. 21.12.2001.
To substantiate their claim petitioners have filed a charts as Annexures-1 and to the writ petition showing the period of functioning by them, and said charts have been duly verified by the Range Officer, Drumundganj Range on 23.06.2008. Along with the counter affidavit other charts have been appended as Annexures C.A.-1 and C.A-2. Said charts have also been duly verified by the same officer. In respect of these documents, it has been mentioned that the same are not based on true facts and the petitioners have never worked regularly in the department. Most surprising feature of the counter affidavit is that certification made by the officer has not been disputed and it has also not been contended that the signatures appended are forged or manipulated one. In this background once two different charts have been filed before this Court, it would be much more appropriate that the officer concerned be directed to file his explanation as to which of the two documents is correct and under what circumstances two different documents have been certified by him. Let this exercise be undertaken within two weeks.
List this case after two weeks.
Order Date :- 10.5.2011 SRY