Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI
State of UP – Appellant
Versus
Mahaveer Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. state's appeal against regularization of petitioners' services. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. consideration of petitioners' claims under regularization rules. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. judicial interpretation of continuous service for regularization. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. conditions for regularization based on long-term employment. (Para 9) |
| 5. remittance for fresh consideration of regularization claims. (Para 10 , 11) |
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
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.
Daily wage employees who meet the eligibility criteria under the Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages Appointments on Group 'D' Posts Rules, 2001, are entitled to be considered for regularizat....
The court established that continuous service post-reinstatement qualifies an employee for regularization, despite prior court intervention.
The court reaffirmed that long-serving employees, despite irregular appointments, are entitled to regularization, emphasizing the importance of continuity of service without considering minor lapses ....
Point of Law : Court that practice of the respondent Corporation in not regularizing the service of the workmen even though they have completed eight years of service, amounts to unfair labour practi....
Long-term employees performing essential and continuous functions may claim regularization after a decade of service, despite previous procedural irregularities.
Long continuous service (>10 years) as daily wagers on perennial essential duties entitles regularization consideration despite irregular initial engagement; distinguishes irregular from illegal appo....
The court ruled that employees' classification should not deny them regularization rights when they have continuously served in essential roles, emphasizing the need for fair treatment in employment ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
