Lal Chand Bind And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 7686 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 36
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10472 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Lal Chand Bind And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Lok Nath Shukla
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. It appears that petitioners have missed the bus as they have already attained the age of 60 years, which is not disputed by learned counsel for petitioners. He, however, submits that even after attaining the age of superannuation petitioners' right can be considered and in view of judgment passed by this Court in Devki Nandan and others vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (7) ADJ 334 for regularization after granting age relaxation (maximum age is 45 years). He further submits that petitioners were regularly approaching before authorities, however, there is no document on record in support of submission except a vague averment made in paras 8 and 10 of the writ petition, which is not supported by any document.

2. Regularization of Seasonal Amin is governed by U.P. Collection Amins Service Rules, 1974, as amended by 5th Amendment Rules 1992 and the relevant rules were considered in Devki Nandan (supra) wherein certain directions were passed and relevant direction for the purpose of present case is reproduced as under:

"3. For the purpose, the State-respondent would be requiring to place all relevant material before the Governor so that all attending circumstances are brought to his notice so as to form an opinion as to whether relaxation is to be granted or not; and the manner in which the said power is to be exercised."

3. The grievance of petitioners is that their case is not considered in terms of above direction. However, petitioners have not been able to show, whether they have approached this Court thereafter, or they have presented their case before respondents-authorities. As such, by way of filing this writ petition on 13.07.2022 when they have already attained age of superannuation, the relief sought cannot be granted as they have come with the prayer which is akin to be a stale claim.

4. In view of above, relief prayed cannot be granted to petitioners under writ jurisdiction. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 21.7.2022

AK