Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Allahabad High Court

Manish Kumar Sonkar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 21 October, 2019

Author: Ashwani Kumar Mishra

Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 38
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 16585 of 2019
 

 
Petitioner :- Manish Kumar Sonkar
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhole Ram
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
 

Pursuant to an order passed by this Court on 7.10.2017 in Contempt Petition No.4269 of 2017, petitioner's representation has been considered and rejected by the Inspector General (Registration) vide order dated 29.11.2017. This order records that petitioner was engaged through an outsourcing agency between 15.9.2001 to 28.2.2002, and that he has not appeared after 1.3.2002. The agency has also disengaged him on 10th March, 2002. It is observed that necessary ingredients to invoke Regularization Rules of 2001, in the facts of the present case are not made out, inasmuch as petitioner was neither engaged before the cut off date, nor he was working on the relevant date, and therefore his plea of regularization is not sustainable.

Though the order is assailed but none of the findings are specifically shown to be perverse or erroneous. No material has been placed before the Court, which may show that petitioner has worked on the cut off date, and has continuously been working thereafter. Merely making of representation would not suffice. Even otherwise, the writ petition is filed after expiry of more than two years of the passing of order without any justifiable reason.

Writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.

Order Date :- 21.10.2019 Anil