Allahabad High Court
Ram Niwas vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. ... on 15 March, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 28847 of 2019
Petitioner :- Ram Niwas
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Forest Lko. And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Tabrez Iqbal
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Mohd. Tabrez Iqbal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ram Pratap Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel.
2. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 9.4.2018, whereby the petitioner's claim for regularization on Class-IV post in the Forest Department has been rejected on the ground that from 20.6.1991 to December 2001, there was break in service of the petitioner as daily wage employee about three years and two months and, therefore, as per Rule 4(1)(a) of the Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages Appointments on Group 'D' Posts Rules, 2001, he was not eligible to be regularized.
3. As per the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner was engaged initially as Gateman (Class-IV) on Group-D post in January, 1984 at Chilharia Barrier in Sohelwa Range, District Bahraich where he worked till June, 1990. Thereafter, the petitioner was posted at Malhipur Barrier in Kakardari Range. After carving out new District Shrawasti, the petitioner was attached and deputed as Postman/Dakia in Bhinga Range, Shrawasti Division in the office of the Divisional Forest Officer, Shrawasti Division, Shrawasti.
4. The petitioner moved an application on 29.3.1992 for regularizing his services. The Forest Range Officer vide order dated 29.3.1992 recommended for regularization of the services of the petitioner saying that he was continuously working from 12.1.1984 till the date of recommendation as Gateman and his work and conduct was always good.
5. Despite this recommendation by the Forest Range Officer, the petitioner's services were not regularized. The petitioner again on 26.6.1994 moved another application for regularization of his services on Class-IV post. When no action was taken for regularization of the services of the petitioner, he filed Writ Petition (SS) No.4674 (SS) of 1994 before this Court.
6. During the pendency of the writ petition, the dispute regarding regularization of the services of daily wage employees in the Forest Department went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court vide judgment and order dated 21.2.2002 in the case of State of U.P. Vs. Puttil Lal directed the State Government to regularize the services of the daily wage employees in accordance with the statutory rules and until regularization, the daily wage employees should be paid their wages in the minimum of pay scale.
7. This Court vide order dated 17.7.2002 passed in Writ Petition No.4674 (SS) of 1994 filed by the petitioner directed the opposite parties to pay minimum of pay scale to the petition for Class-IV post. Despite the interim order by this Court on 17.7.2002, the petitioner was not paid the minimum of pay scale and he was granted the minimum of pay scale only on 31.7.2009.
8. The State Government framed statutory rules for regularization of daily wage employees known as ?Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages Appointments on Group 'D' Posts Rules, 2001? (for short Rules, 2001?), which provide that any person, who was directly appointed on daily wage basis on a Group ?D? post in the Government service before 29.6.1991 and is continuing in service and possesses the requisite qualification prescribed for regular appointment for that post at the time of such appointment on daily wage basis, shall be considered for regular appointment in permanent or temporary vacancy as may be available in Group ?D? post, on the date of commencement of these Rules.
9. After the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Putti Lal (Supra), the opposite parties prepared a seniority list of daily wagers working in the Shrawasti Division of the Forest Department for the purposes of regularization of their services. The petitioner's name finds place at serial no.16 of the said seniority list. It is alleged that despite the petitioner was placed at serial no.16 in the seniority list, which was prepared for regularizing the services of daily wagers, juniors to the petitioner were regularized and the claim of the petitioner was ignored. Regularization order dated 8.9.2002 regularizing the other daily wage employees and leaving the petitioner, has been placed on record as Annexure-6 to the writ petition.
10. Again on 23.6.2011, Chief Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh sanctioned 2059 posts in Class-IV for regularization of the daily wager employees in the Forest Department. In pursuance to the said order dated 23.6.2011 sanctioning 2059 posts for regularizing the services of daily wage employees, again the petitioner's claim was ignored for regularization, whereas his juniors were regularized.
11. This Court disposed of Writ Petition No.4674 (SS) of 1994 filed by the petitioner vide order dated 24.9.2014 with liberty to the petitioner to make suitable representation before the competent authority and the competent authority was directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of filing of the representation in the light of Rules, 2001. In pursuance to the said order passed by this Court, the petitioner moved a representation, which was rejected by the competent authority vide order dated 13.12.2014.
12. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, petitioner filed Writ Petition No.701 (SS) of 2016 before this Court and this Court vide order dated 14.1.2016 disposed the said writ petition with direction to the Divisional Forest Officer, Shrawasti Division, Shrawasti to consider the case of the petitioner under the Rules, 2001 as amended from time to time in the light of the judgement of this Court dated 24.9.2014 and give consideration within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the order before him. In compliance of the said direction issued by this Court vide order dated 14.1.2016, the petitioner's case for regularization was considered and again rejected as mentioned above.
13. The ground taken for rejecting the claim of the petitioner, does not appear to be a valid and justified ground inasmuch in the seniority list dated 16.8.2017 placed on record as Annexure-11 to the writ petition, it is mentioned that the petitioner has been initially appointed in the year 1984 on daily wage basis and he had been continued since then and he was granted minimum of pay scale on Class-IV post vide order dated 31.7.2009. It is not in dispute that juniors to the petitioner, namely, Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Jai Prakash Singh and Dhirendra Pratap Singh, have been regularized vide order dated 2.3.2019, whereas the petitioner, who is senior to them and is also getting minimum of pay scale, has not been regularized.
14. In view thereof, I am of the opinion that the petitioner has been discriminated vis-a-vis his juniors such as Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Jai Prakash Singh and Dhirendra Pratap Singh have been regularized vide order dated 2.3.2019. The aforesaid action of the opposite parties is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and thus, the impugned order declining the claim of the petitioner for regularization on Class-IV post, is liable to be quashed.
15. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 9.4.2018 passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Shrawasti Division, Shrawasti is hereby quashed. Opposite parties are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date on which his immediate juniors have been regularized vide order dated 2.3.2019. Necessary order for regularization of the services of the petitioner should be passed within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the Divisional Forest Officer, Shrawasti Division, Shrawasti without any fail.
Order Date :- 15.3.2023
Rao/-
