Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY
Jamuna Prasad Nigam – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' claims of work status and irregular payment (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 2. no supportive evidence of regularization claims (Para 4 , 8 , 14) |
| 3. challenges to seniority lists and their legitimacy (Para 7 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. court's call for further investigation into regularization (Para 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 5. judicial refusal to interfere based on statutory interpretation (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri. Daya Shankar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Abhinava Krishna Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.2, and Sri Yashwant Singh, learned Standing Counsel.
2. Present writ petition was filed in the year 2009 and no interim order was granted and finally it is decided after more than 17 years by present judgment.
3. Petitioners, five in numbers have approached this Court in the year 2009 that they were working since 1990 as Awazdar Karmchari, ¼,otnkj½ on daily wage to undertake work of a Switch Man, in absence of regular Switchman.
4. It was further case of petitioners that though they worked for 30 days in a month
The court upheld that petitioners did not meet the necessary conditions for regularization as daily wage workers under the applicable rules, due to insufficient employment records.
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 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.
The court established that employees cannot claim regularization unless they are working against sanctioned posts, as per the Jharkhand Regularization Rules of 2015 and 2019.
The court established that daily-wage employees engaged before the cut-off date are entitled to regularization under the Rules of 2016, regardless of initial appointment irregularities.
The principle of 'equal pay for equal work' may not apply to temporary employees, and unexplained delay in approaching the court can impact the decision.
The court ruled that administrative decisions regarding employment regularization must avoid arbitrary discrimination and adhere to principles of equal treatment under the law.
The court held that regularization of employees cannot be claimed retrospectively unless supported by sufficient sanctioned posts, reaffirming the discretion of the Corporation in policy matters.
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
