SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.
Ramraj Pandey - Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Others - Respondents
Writ - A No. 3155 of 2022
Decided On : 27-09-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Raj Kumar Mishra.
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Mata Achal Mishra.

Engagement on a daily wage basis does not entitle an individual to reinstatement or regularization.

Headnote:

Regularization - Service Dispute - U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - U.P. Town Area Act - Government Orders of 1992 - Pension Rules - [SUMMARY]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a daily wage worker, sought regularization and pension after being terminated in 1991. The court considered the petitioner's service history, government orders, and previous judgments.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner was engaged on a daily wage basis and not entitled to reinstatement or regularization. The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that there was no direction for reinstatement in the previous judgment.

Issues: Regularization, Pension Entitlement, Interpretation of Government Orders, Service Status

Ratio Decidendi: The petitioner's engagement on a daily wage basis did not entitle him to reinstatement or regularization. The court's previous judgment did not direct reinstatement, and the petitioner could not challenge the regularization order while relying on it.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondents No. 1, 2, 4, and 6 and Sri Mata Achal Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent no.5.

2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-

    “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARY quashing the impugned order dated 02.12.2021 (Annexure No.01) passed by the respondent no.5.

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARY quashing the regularization order dated 24.05.2011 (Annexure No:09) passed by the respondent no.5.

(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the the respondents to modify/correct the regularization order dated 24.05.2011 in pursuance of the Order/Judgment dated 24.10.1997 (Annexure No. 5) passed by this Hon’ble Court in C.M.W.P. No. 22313 of 1991.

(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondents to modify/correct the regularization order dated 24.05.2011 in the light of Government Orders namely G.O. No. 1076/9-1-92,95Sa/91 dated 03-02-1992, G.O. No. 4094/ Nau-1-92-95Sa/91 dated 01 05-1992 and G.O. No. 4980/ Nau-1-92 dated 20.05.1992 (Annexure No.3) issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh.

(v) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondents to calculate and pay the pension, gratuity, leave encashment, G.P.F., insurance and other emoluments along with back wages and interest since 05.01.1985.”

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Daily Wage Worker on 05.01.1985 in Nagar Panchayat, Khamariya, District Bhadohi and continued to work as Safai Karamchari and paid on daily wage basis till his illegal termination in 1991, a photocopy of his order of engagement has been filed as Annexure-02 to the petition. In 1992, the State Government issued three Government Orders i.e. G. O No. 1076//9-1-92,Sa/91 dated 03.02.1992, G.O. No. 4094/Nau-1-92-95Sa/91 dated 01.05.1992 and G.O. No. 4980/Nau-1-92 dated 20.05.1992 for Regularization of Daily Wage Workers. In the said Government Orders, it was provided that if a daily wage worker continued for three years or more and had rendered 240 days of service, in each of such three years, he shall be considered for appointment, if he was engaged before 11.10.1989. The petitioner had completed more than four years of service with 240 days in each year before the cut-off date dated 11.10.1989, and therefore, he was entitled to be regularized, but the Nagar Panchayat, Khamariya did not pass any order for Regularization, as the service of the petitioner had been terminated in 1991 itsself, on the ground that the Nagar Panchayat, Khamariya was facing a financial crisis and was unable to pay even its regular employees.

4. The petitioner and three others filed a Writ Petition No. 22313 of 1991 challenging the termination order dated 20.07.1991. The Court by its judgement and order dated 24.10.1997 directed the respondents to look into the matter of Regularization of the petitioners in the light of aforesaid Government Orders. The petitioner made many representations to the concerned authorities, but no heed was paid.

5. The petitioner has mentioned in Paragraph-8 of the Writ Petition that he continued to work without any wages in Nagar Panchayat, Khamariya on the basis of mercy of the officers of the Nagar Panchayat, Khamariya, even though no orders for reinstatement were passed, on the basis of an interim order dated 09.08.1991 in Writ Petition No. 22313 of 1991 even after the Writ Petition was decided. The petitioner pursued the authorities and ultimately the Additional District Magistrate, passed an order on 30.01.2008 on the basis of report submitted by the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Khamariya reintating the petitioner on the post and in the pay-scale held by him earlier. A consequential order was passed on 15.02.2008, reinstating the petitioner on earlier post and pay-scal

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top