Continuous service is not a prerequisite for regularization under the Uttar Pradesh Regularisation Rules, allowing for a fresh consideration of claims by daily wage workers.

JUDGMENT :

1. This intra-court appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment of learned Single Judge rendered in Writ-A No. 19200 of 2019, whereby, the writ petition has been allowed and a direction has been issued to the State-respondent to regularize the services of the respondents-petitioners.

2. It transpires that respondents/petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ-A No. 6580 of 2019 which came to disposed of vide order dated 18.07.2019. The order reads as under:

"Despite grant of opportunity on 26.4.2019 and again on 23.5.2019, learned Standing Counsel has not been able to obtain instructions. It is submitted that the authorities have been communicated but no instructions have been received so far.

Petitioners, who are six in number, alleged that they were engaged in the Government Gardens at Agra as Mali on different dates between 1998 to 2001 and except for certain artificial breaks have continuously being working till date. It is stated that their claim for regularization is covered under the Uttar Pradesh Regularisation of Persons Working On Daily Wages or On Work Charge or On Contract In Government Departments On Group "C" and Group "D" Posts (Outside The Purview Of The Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission) Rules, 2016 notified on 12th September, 2016, but their claim of regularisation has not been examined by the authority concerned. Repeated representations made since have not been bestowed any consideration, as such, petitioners are before this Court.

Learned Standing Counsel states that an appropriate decision would be taken in respect of claim of the petitioners, by the competent authority, in accordance with law.

In the facts and circumstances, noticed above, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction upon the respondent no. 3 to accord consideration to the petitioners' claim for being regularized, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned order to be passed, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

Any artificial break in the working of the petitioners would be ignored and shall not be read against the petitioners. It would, however, be open for the authorities to verify as to whether petitioners had been working on the relevant date i.e. 31st December, 2001 and the second cut off i.e. 12th September, 2016 and have remained in employment throughout except for artificial breaks."

3. Pursuant to above direction, the Deputy Director, Horticulture, Agra Region, Agra vide order dated 14.10.2019 has rejected the claim of the respondents/petitioners on the ground that they had not worked continuously. The officer concerned has placed reliance upon a chart prepared by the officer in respect of the working of the respondents-writ petitioners which is extracted herein:

4. Learned Single Judge has taken note of the U.P. Regularization of Persons Working on Daily Wages or on Work Charge or on Contract in Government Departments on Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ Posts (Outside the Purview of U.P. Public Service Commission) Rules, 2016 and has observed that rule 6(1)(i) provides that a person who isconsidered to be regularized must be directly engaged or employed on or before 31st December, 2001 and must be still engaged or employed or deployed or working as such on the date of commencement of the rules.

5. Learned Single Judge has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Janardan Yadav Vs. State of U. P. and others , 2008 (1) UPLBEC 498, wherein, the learned Single Judge of this Court while interpreting the pari materia provisions