HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

11 September, 2025

Writ Petition Service Single No.1877 of 2015

Baldev Joshi and Another --Petitioners

Versus

State Of Uttarakhand and Ors. --Respondents

With

Writ Petition Service Single No.1878 of 2015

Baldev Joshi and Another --Petitioners

Versus

State Of Uttarakhand and Ors. --Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Rahul Adhikari, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Mr. Anil Dabral, learned Additional C.S.C. with Mr. Bhupendra Koranga and Mr. Tarun Mohan, learned Brief

Holders for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents.

Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

Since in these writ petitions, common question

of law and facts are involved, hence, they are being taken up together and are being decided by this common judgment. However, for the sake of brevity, the facts of

No.1877 of 2015 are taken into consideration alone.

2. By means of these writ petitions, petitioners have challenged the order dated 29.09.2014 as well as prayed for a direction to the respondents to permit them in the peaceful function on the post of Class IV in the District Rural Development Agency (D.R.D.A.)

Champawat and accordingly pay them salary.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that initially they were appointed on daily wages basis in the P.R.D.

(Pantiya Rakshak Dal) in the year 2003 and thereafter they were appointed with the respondent No.4-DRDA Champawat as Peon on contract basis in July 2007. On 14.11.2013, the respondent No.4 granted bonus to the petitioners. On 18.06.2013, the respondent No.4 has sent the names of petitioners for absorption to respondent No.2 in pursuant to the letter dated 17.05.2013 issued by the Secretary Rural Development Uttarakhand, whereby, the information was sought regarding the absorption of employee working in the D.R.D.A. But, instead of regularizing the services of the petitioners on Class IV post, the respondents arbitrarily without giving any opportunity of hearing or show cause notice to the petitioners orally discontinued the services of the petitioners. The petitioners had completed more than five years continuous service as contract employee in D.R.D.A. till 2013. Feeling aggrieved by it, petitioners have filed a writ petition before this Court bearing WPSS No.395 of 2014 Baldev Joshi and Others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, which was disposed of vide order dated 06.09.2014, with a direction to respondent no.3 that in case there is sufficient budget and there is need for the petitioners, he shall consider engaging the petitioners in the project. After the said order, respondent No.4 passed order dated 29.09.2014, whereby, petitioners were informed that there is no need of Volunteers of P.R.D. in D.R.D.A. Thus, the petitioners are before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.4 itself sent the names of the petitioners for absorption on 18.06.2013. He further submits that the petitioners were appointed on Class IV post against the sanction and vacant post in the month of July 2007 and on the date of notification of the Regularization of Daily Wages, Work Charge, Contract, Fixed Salary, Part Time and Ad-hoc Employees Rules 2013, petitioners have completed more than five years continuous service as contract employee in D.R.D.A. Champawat, therefore, the petitioners are fully eligible to be regularized their services on Class IV post as per the Regularization Rules, 2013.

5. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that in compliance of this Court’s order dated 06.09.2014, when respondent No.4 passed order dated 29.09.2014, petitioners were not the volunteers of the P.R.D. at that time, they were contract employee of the D.R.D.A. and further the State Government had already been sanctioned the sufficient budget. Further, the petitioners have sought information under the Right to Information Act from the District Youth Welfare and Prantiya Rakshak Dal, Champawat, in which, it was c