Bhanu Shanker vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 14339 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 17
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6996 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Bhanu Shanker
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Pathak
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

1. Heard Sri Piyush Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.

2. It has been submitted that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Seasonal Collection Amin on 2.2.1989. It has further been submitted that his name finds mentioned in the seniority list prepared on 29.11.2006 of Seasonal/Ad-hoc group of Collection Amin of District Unnao where 38 names of Collections Amins were mentioned and the name of the petitioner finds mentioned at serial No.19 of the said list. Despite the fact that the petitioner is working continuously since 1989 till date his services have not been regularized. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that his regularization was duly considered by a duly constituted selection committee on 29.11.2006 and approved for regularization but only due to the fact that the vacancies were not existing, the services of the petitioner was not regularized. This aspect of the matter has been dealt with in the letter of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Unnao on 17.3.2021. Learned counsel has further informed this Court that one Lalta Singh whose name is mentioned at serial No.11 of the said list and in respect of whom similar orders were passed, approached this Court by filing writ petition No.8660 (S/S) of 2019, which was allowed vide order dated 28.7.2021 and direction was given to the District Magistrate/Collector, Unnao to consider his claim for regularization and confirmation on the post of Collection Amin with effect from the date when this benefit has been extended to his juniors. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of the said judgment.

3. After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievances of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case opposite party No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in this regard which he has already submitted on 20.9.2022 and is pending consideration.

4. Learned Standing counsel does not object if the said prayer is acceded to.

5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to opposite party No.2 raising all his grievances with regard to his regularization within one week from today. In case such a representation is made opposite party No.2 shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, say within a period of eight weeks thereafter by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law and communicate the decision to the petitioner.

Order Date :- 19.10.2022 (Alok Mathur, J.)

RKM.