IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT, J.
Ramashankar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ (A) No. 14574 of 2021
Decided On : 10-03-2025
JUDGMENT :
AJAY BHANOT, J.
1. Heard Shri Rampyare Lal Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents No. 1 and 2 and Shri M. J. Akhtar, learned counsel for the respondents No. 3 and 4.
2. By the impugned order dated 16.08.2021 passed by the respondent No. 4 i.e. Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad Zamania, District Ghazipur the claim of the petitioner for regularization has been declined on the footing that the petitioner is working as an outsourced employee and is not covered by the Uttar Pradesh 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 the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter the 'Regularization Rules').
3. The petitioner was engaged as a daily wager in the respondent Nagar Palika Parishad as an Electrician w.e.f. 23.01.2001. The services of the petitioner have been uninterrupted and continuous since the date of his appointment.
4. The entitlement of regularization of the petitioner flows from Rule-6 of Regularization Rules is quoted herein under:-
"6. (1) Any person who:
(i) was directly engaged or employed or deployed or working on daily wages or on work charge or on contract in a Government Department on Group 'C' or Group 'D' post (outside the purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission) on or before December 31, 2001 and is still engaged or employed or deployed or working as such on the date of the commencement of these rules;
(ii) possessed requisite qualifications prescribed for regular appointment for that post at the time of such engagement or employment or deployment on daily wages or on work charge or on contract, under the relevant service rules and, subject to the provisions of above mentioned rules 2 and 5, shall be considered for regular appointment on Group 'C' or Group 'D' post (outside the purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission) in permanent or temporary vacancy as may be available on the date of the commencement of these rules, on the basis of his record and suitability before any regular appointment is made in such vacancy in accordance with the relevant service rules or orders.
(2) In making regular appointments under these rules, reservations for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes and other categories, shall be made in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Schedule Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994, and the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Physically Handicapped, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Ex-Servicemen) Act, 1993, as amended from time to time, and the orders of the Government in force at the time of regularisation under these rules.
(3) For the purpose of sub-rule (1), the appointing authority shall constitute a Selection Committee in accordance with the relevant provisions of service rules.
(4) The appointing authority shall, having regard to the provisions of sub-rule (1), prepare an eligibility list of the candidates, arranged in order of seniority as determined from the date of engagement or employment or deployment on daily wages, on work charge or on contract and, if two or more persons are engaged or employed or deployed together, from the order in which their names are arranged in the said engagement or employment or deployment order. The list shall be placed before the Selection Committee alongwith the character rolls and such other relevant records, pertaining to them, as may be considered necessary to assess their suitability.
(5) The Selection Committee shall consider the cases of the candidates on the basis of their records, referred to in sub-rule (4), and if considers necessary, it may interview the candidates also to assess their suitability.
(6) The Selection Committee shall prepare a list of selected candidate arranging their names




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 ....
Long-term employees performing essential and continuous functions may claim regularization after a decade of service, despite previous procedural irregularities.
Long-standing service without a formal appointment does not deny employees the right to regularization; discriminatory treatment of similarly situated employees violates principles of equity and fair....
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 ....
Regularization of employees engaged for over ten years without interim court orders is mandated; exploitative contractual practices are disallowed.
Long-standing service and fulfillment of criteria establish entitlement for regularization under service law, preventing arbitrary denial of rights.
Regularization of employees must consider equitable treatment and the rights of long-serving individuals, given principles of fairness under the Constitution.
Long-term employees engaged in continuous service are entitled to regularization and benefits even post-retirement if their claims remain pending during their service, subject to compliance with appl....
Regularization of long-serving daily wage employees is mandated after 10 years of service, acknowledging functional continuity despite initial irregularities, violating constitutional rights otherwis....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.