WPSS/898/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 2614 UK

                     Office Notes, reports,
SL.                 orders or proceedings or
          Date                                                 COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                 directions and Registrar's
                     order with Signatures


      26.07.2021
                                                WPSS No. 898 of 2021
                                                Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

(Via Video Conferencing) Mr. Pooran Singh Rawat, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mrs. Indu Sharma, Brief Holder, for the State of Uttarakhand.

The petitioners to the present writ petition have preferred this writ petition claiming for a relief, that a writ of mandamus may be issued to the respondents, particularly the respondent No. 2, herein, to regularise their services under the garb of the principles laid down in the Notification No. 1298/XXX(2)/2013-3(1)/2006 dated 30.12.2013, contending thereof that since they are rendering their uninterrupted and unblemished services w.e.f. 2010 and 2005 respectively, they are entitled to be considered for grant of regularisation, under the principles which had been laid down by the said Government Order.

The Registry has raised an objection that there is deficiency of the Court fee. In response to it, the learned counsel for the petitioners, who has been appointed through Legal Services Authority, had submitted that when a person approaches the Court by deriving the free legal services from the Legal Services Authority, and when the petitioner is being represented by the counsel appointed by the Legal Services Authority, the Court fee has to be waived off in the light of the judgment, on which he places reliance, as reported in 2014 (4) SCC 163, Manoharan Vs. Shivarajan.

In view of the said principle, the objection raised by the Registry regarding deficiency of Court fee paid on the petition, is overruled.

At this stage, considering the nature of relief sought by the petitioners for considering their claim for regularisation of their services in the office of respondent No. 2, this Court thinks it to be apt to dispose of this writ petition, directing the petitioners to file a detailed representation before respondent No. 2, to consider their claim for regularisation in the light of the Government Order, which has been relied by the petitioners dated 30.12.2013.

The Respondent No. 2, herein, is hereby requested that he would consider the representation of the petitioners within the period of two months from its filing and pass an appropriate reasoned order exclusively in accordance with law.

However, disposal of this writ petition with the above direction, will not lead to an inference or a debate to a rest as to whether petitioners fall to be state employees or public servants in order to sustain the writ petition.

Subject to above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 26.07.2021 Mahinder/