Uttarakhand High Court
Madan Singh Rawat vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 19 April, 2021
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (S/S) No. 2749 of 2019
Madan Singh Rawat ........... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and others ........ Respondents
Mr. Vinoda Nand Barthwal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs. Anjali Bhargawa, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State/respondent
nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Adarsh Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Mr. N.S. Pundir, Advocate for the
respondent nos.3 and 4.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the
following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue writ rule or direction in the nature of mandamus
to the Respondents no.1 & 2 for regularization of the
petitioner with speaking order and grant of minimum
pay scale to him.
(ii) Issue writ rule or direction in the nature mandamus
directing to the respondents to consider the case of
petitioner for regularization keeping in view his
continuous services, since 02.02.1997 and in view the
facts mentioned in the body of the writ petition along
with all consequential benefits and to declare he
continuation of the petitioner since, 02.02.1997 on the
post of electric line man is substantive and continuous
and for same and identical nature of work for all
practical purposes.
(iii) Issue writ rule or direction in the nature of prohibition
to restrain the respondents to start any exercise of
regularization without including the name of the
petitioner in the eligibility list of electric line man and
also to direct the respondents to keep one post of
electric line man reserve till the redressal of grievances
of the petitioner.
(iv) Issue writ rule or direction appropriate in the nature
mandamus directing the respondents to classify the
petitioner as permanent workmen as per Model
Standing Orders or for regularization in terms of the
regularization rules of 2013 by treating the continuous
work of petitioner as substantive and permanent and
also against available and vacant post, after calling the
entire records in view of the facts highlighted in the
body of the petition.
(v) Issue any other writ rule or direction, which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case.
(vi) Award cost of petition. "
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been working as
an Electric Lineman with the Nagar Palika, Tehri Garhwal,
Uttarakhand with effect from 02.02.1997. But, he has neither been paid
the salary for which he is entitled nor he has been regularized.
3. State did not choose to file counter affidavit. The
respondent nos.3 and 4, Nagar Palika, Tehri Garhwal has filed counter
affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit has also been filed.
4. This matter is being heard through video conferencing.
5. Today, at the time of hearing, at the very outset learned
counsel for the petitioner would submit that he restricts his prayer that
the respondent no.3 may be directed to decide the representation dated
01.10.2019, filed by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner
would also submit that similarly situated employees had also filed
WPSS No.689 of 2020, which has been decided on 15.07.2020, with
the directions to the department to decide the representation.
6. In fact, this fact has been stated in para 9 of the petition
and the respondent nos.3 and 4 in paragraph no.6 of their counter
affidavit has admitted that such a representation was filed and has also
further stated that they had made recommendation and the respondent
nos.3 and 4 has no role in the matter. But today, at the time of
arguments, on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4, Mr. Adarsh Tiwari,
Advocate gives a statement that the representation dated 01.10.2019,
filed by the petitioner will be decided by the respondent nos.3 within a
period of five weeks from today.
7. The Court takes on record the statement made by the
learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4.
8. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the
respondent no.3 to decide the representation dated 01.10.2019, filed by
the petitioner within a period of five weeks from today.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
19.04.2021
Sanjay
