The right to regularization under the Rules of 2016 is based on continuous engagement prior to the cut-off date and possession of requisite qualifications, regardless of initial appointment validity.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-appellants and Sri Gejendra Pratap, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Jitendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present intra court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 09.04.2024 passed in Writ-A No.13630 of 2023 (Shailendra Kumar Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others) whereby the order dated 25. 07.2023 passed by the Principal Secretary, Urban Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, rejecting the claim for regularization of the petitioners, has been quashed and a direction has been issued for passing fresh orders within stipulated time period.

3. The controversy involved in the present case relates to the claim of the petitioners/opposite party nos.1 to 9, stated to be working as daily wagers on various class-3 and class-4 posts in the establishment of the Nagar Panchayat, Harraiya, District Basti (for short ‘the Nagar Panchayat’), for regularization under the U.P. Regularization of Persons Working on Daily Wages or on Work Charge or on Contract in Government Department on Group 'C' and Group 'D' Posts (Outside the Purview of the U.P. Public Service Commission) Rules, 2016 [the Rules of 2016].

4. The requisite information in regard to the aforesaid claim is stated to have been forwarded by the Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat by means of a communication dated 05.09.2017, and since the same remained pending before the concerned authority, the petitioners approached the Court by filing Writ-A No.3491 of 2020 which was disposed of by means of an order dated 3. 03.2020 upon a statement of the learned Standing Counsel for the State authorities that claim of the petitioners for regularization shall be duly considered in accordance with law and the provisions made under the scheme and a final decision in that respect would be communicated to the concerned Nagar Panchayat.

5. Consequent to the aforesaid direction the claim of the petitioners was rejected by the Director of Local Bodies, U.P. by means of an order dated 04.12.2020, holding that since the Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat had not put forward any demand for creation of supernumerary posts, no regularization could be ordered in the petitioners' favour.

6. The aforesaid order was put to challenge in Writ-A No.10908 of 2021, which was disposed of by the Court by means of a judgment dated 28.10.2021 whereby the order dated 04.12.2020 passed by the Director, Local Bodies, was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Director/ State Government for a fresh consideration bearing in mind the order passed by the Court, as also Rule 5 of the Rules of 2016.

7. The direction issued in the aforesaid judgment dated 28. 10.2021 having not been complied within the prescribed time period, the petitioners moved a contempt application being Contempt Application (Civil) No.2703 of 2022; thereafter the Special Secretary to the State Government in the Department of Urban Development passed an order dated 31.10.2022 rejecting their claim, on the ground that neither copies of the petitioners' appointment letters nor certificates of their continuance in service were made available by the Executive Engineer of the Nagar Panchayat or Directorate of Local Bodies.

8. The order dated 31.10.2022 was subjected to challenge by means of Writ-A No.4506 of 2023, and when the same came up for admission, on 17.03.2023, the Court, after observing that the order dated 31.10.2022 passed by the Special Secretary could not be said to be an order on merits as directed in terms of the judgment dated 28.10.2021 passed in Writ-A No.10908 of 2021, directed the Special Secretary, Nagar Nikaya, Government of UP, to pass a reasoned and speaking order on merits after summoning all relevant records, and to file the same alongwith his personal affidavit before the Court.

9. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Principal Secretary, Local Bodies pa