Pramod Kumar Awasthi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 13676 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 8
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 625 of 2022
 
Petitioner :- Pramod Kumar Awasthi
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Horticulture And Food Processing Govt.Of U.P. Lko. Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Mani Tripathi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Heard Shri Anurag Tripathi, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Anand Mani Tripathi as well as learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State and go through the record.

2. The present petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking following relief:-

"i Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the order dated 15.11.2021 passed by Special Secretary Government of U.P., Civil Secretariat Lucknow i.e. opposite party no.2 as contained Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.

ii Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding/directing the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner for regular appointment from the date the names of other persons were called and appointment have been made like Subhash Chandra Tewari and others and also pay all other consequential Service benefits."

3. The petitioner was working as daily wager from the year 1987. In pursuance to the Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages (Appointment on Group-D Posts) Rules, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 2001") the petitioner's services came to be regularized with effect from 30.10.2002 on the post of Peon (Class IV). The petitioner is claiming seniority from the date of his engagement as daily wager. The Rule 7 of Regularization Rules, 2001 itself provides that the seniority should be counted from the date of regularization.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has tried his best to support his claim. However, he has not been able to place any judgment or any rule under which the petitioner would be entitled for seniority from the date of his engagement as daily wager.

5. As the said rule itself provides for counting seniority from the date of regularization, this Court cannot alter seniority of the petitioner in absence of any challenge to the said rule. In view thereof, I find no substance in the present petition, which is hereby dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.5.2023/Raj