Back
RITU BAHRI, RAKESH THAPLIYAL
State of Uttarakhand – Appellant
Versus
Gauri Dutt – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(per Ms. Ritu Bahri, C.J.) The facts of the present case are that out of the three petitioners, services of the writ petitioner nos.1 and 2 was regularized, and they were given a benefit of regularization notionally on the date of their superannuation i.e. on 31.05.2018 and 30.09.2017. However, the benefit of notional benefit of the regularization was not given to the writ petitioner no.3. He was retired on 31.01.2017.
2. Keeping in view the above fact, the learned Single Judge has rightly allowed the writ petitions, in paragraph 52 of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in WPSS No.910 of 2021, “Ganga Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others” and connected matters, it has been observed that if juniors to the employees, who were appointed as daily wager has been regularized that could not be a valid reason for the State for not considering the regularization of those employees, who were appointed as a daily wager prior to them.
3. This aspect has been considered in detail in “Prem Ram Vs. Managing Director, Uttarakhand Pey Jal and Nirman Nigam, Dehradun and others” 2015 INSC 428, dated 15.05.2015, by the Hon’ble Apex Court, and it had considered this aspect, whe
The court established that denying regularization to senior daily wagers while juniors were regularized is unjust, and past service should only count for pension benefits.
Employees regularized from daily wage status are entitled to count prior service for pension eligibility, affirming pension as a right under constitutional law.
Prior service as work-charged employees must be counted towards qualifying service for pension, ensuring compliance with principles of fairness and non-discrimination.
Regularization benefits for daily wagers are effective from the notional date of retirement, not retroactively from an earlier date.
Continuous service of 40 years as a daily wager entitles the petitioner to pensionary benefits from the date of initial appointment, not from the date of regularization.
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.
Retiral benefits must be calculated from the date of initial appointment, not from the date of regularization, as established by precedents.
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 petitioners cannot claim regularization of their services from the date of initial appointment and were entitled to count only half of their service rendered in consolidated pay posts for pension....
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
