Allahabad High Court
Raju And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Of Law And ... on 15 September, 2023
Bench: Kshitij Shailendra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:178863
Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 22845 of 2005
Petitioner :- Raju And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. Of Law And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Piyush Narain Dubey,Kamla Kant Mishra,Varun Mishra
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,K.R. Sirohi,Sudhir Mehrotra
Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
1. Supplementary counter affidavit filed in pursuance of the order dated 04.08.2023 is taken in record.
2. Heard Shri Kamla Kant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, special counsel for the Allahabad High Court representing respondent no. 2.
3. By means of the present writ petition a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners w.e.f. their initial appointment and to pay arrears of difference of pay-scale of the post of Sweeper in judgeship of Firozabad.
4. On 04.08.2023 following order was passed by this Court:-
1. Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondent has produced certain letters/ instructions and report of the concerned judgeship to the effect that there is no post vacant for the purposes of regularization and the entire quota has already been filled by regularizing those who were entitled. In so far as the petitioner no.1 is concerned, it is stated that he is being paid Rs.6,000/- per month as salary as per Government Order dated 10.08.2016.
2. It is admitted between the parties that the petitioner no.2 has died and the petitioner no.3 has retired before the Regularization Rules, 2016 came into force.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find that the writ petition requires to be amended with necessary averments and additional parties.
4. Sri Mehrotra shall file a short supplementary counter affidavit within two weeks bringing on record the entire documents which have been placed before this Court today in the form of instructions and shall also state the position of persons who have been regularized with necessary details of overall and interse seniority and years of their regularization.
5. List this case on 29.08.2023.
5. Out of three petitioners, as such, the claim of petitioner no. 1 (Raju) only is being considered in view of the aforesaid order dated 04.08.2023.
6. Whereas the case of the petitioner is that his services are entitled to be regularized in view of the Regularization Rules of 2016, the submission of Shri Mehrotra is that insofar as post of Sweeper is concerned, there are only two sanctioned posts in judgeship of Firozabad which have already been occupied by Shri Ram Sevak and Smt. Sunita Devi. Apart from it, the details of certain employees working on ad-hoc basis have also been given in the short counter affidavit. It has also been pleaded that petitioners cannot claim parity with the ad hoc or regular employees, particularly, when there is no vacancy.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that irrespective of vacancy or anybody's appointment, the claim for regularization cannot be denied, if the case of the petitioner is covered by relevant clauses of Rules of 2016.
8. This petition was filed in the year 2005 and various subsequent developments have taken place during the pendency of the writ petition as no interim order was passed in the present case. The petitioner is admittedly working in the judgeship on a fixed pay, i.e., Rs.6,000/- per month as per the Government order dated 10.08.2016.
9. No fruitful purpose would be served in keeping this writ petition pending or issuing mandamus as claimed it would certainly affect the rights of various other persons whose details have been mentioned in the short counter affidavit.
10. The writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the District Judge Firozabad by annexing necessary documents in relation to his services as well as the Rules relied upon him and also any authority/ judgment of this Court in support of his contention.
11. In case, such a representation is filed within a period of one month from today, the District Judge, Firozabad shall consider the same in accordance with law after providing full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to Shri Ram Sevak and Smt. Sunita Devi who are already working as regular sweepers in the District. Such a decision shall be taken on or before 28.02.2024.
12. Disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.
Order Date :- 15.9.2023
Vipasha
