Allahabad High Court
Bajrang Bali Misra vs State Of U.P.Through Secy Board Of ... on 12 February, 2020
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 17 Case :- SERVICE SINGLE No. - 2690 of 2006 Petitioner :- Bajrang Bali Misra Respondent :- State Of U.P.Through Secy Board Of Revenue And 2 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Dileep Kumar Gautam Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Gautam learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.
2. Petition had initially been filed against order dated 3rd March, 2005 rejecting petitioner's candidature for regularization. By means of amendment, prayer regarding regularization of services of petitioner from the date when persons junior to him have been regularized has also been made.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that despite the fact that petitioner was appointed as Seasonal Collection Peon in 1988, his candidature for regularization in service was rejected primarily on the ground that he had not completed satisfactory working of four fasli and his actual working period was only one year, three months and one day. Further ground taken in the impugned order was that his work was unsatisfactory, apart from the fact that there was no vacant post available for regularization of petitioner in service. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that Rule 5 of U.P. Collection Peons Service Rules, 2004 stipulates that Seasonal Collection Peons would be recruited to the post of regular Collection Peon after having worked satisfactory for at least four fasli and whose age as on the first day of July of the year in which selection is made does not exceed 45 years. It has been submitted that although the rules pertained to the year 2004 but conditions to the same effect were prevalent with regard to regularization of Seasonal Collection Peon by means of various Government Orders issued from time to time in pursuance to which the impugned order has been passed.
4. Learned counsel has drawn attention to the rejoinder affidavit indicating the fact that subsequently during pendency of writ petition, various other Seasonal Collection peons employed after petitioner in service, have been regularized by means of order dated 3rd January, 2017. The said list is annexed to the rejoinder affidavit and indicates names of 20 persons. As such it has been submitted that prior to consideration of said persons, petitioner's case for regularization should also have been considered.
5. Learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties on the basis of counter affidavit submits that conditions analogous to Rule 5 of the Service Rules of 2004 were prevalent at the time of initial consideration of petitioner for regularization in service by means of various Government Orders requiring a Seasonal Collection Peon to have completed four fasli of satisfactory work and of being below 45 years of age. In case of petitioner, since he had not completed satisfactory work of four fasli, his candidature was rightly rejected for regularization in service. With regard to subsequent regularization order issued on 3rd January, 2017, learned State Counsel does not have any instructions in the matter.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and material on record, it is evident that by means of order dated 3rd January, 2017, 20 Seasonal Collection Peons have been regularized in service. A perusal of list of Seasonal Collection Peons annexed as Annexure 2 to the rejoinder affidavit has been filed indicating the name of petitioner at Sl. No. 41. The said list has not been disputed by opposite parties by filing any supplementary affidavit. The said list however does not pertain to any seniority and has in fact been issued in accordance with the number of working days of a Seasonal Collection Peon. However reading of the list would indicte that certain persons such as Sri Jata Shanker Singh have been shown to be appointed on the post of Seasonal Collection Peon on 27th May, 2000 whereas petitioner's date of appointment has been indicated in the said list as 9th June, 1988 which corroborates with the date indicted in the impugned order. The said fact is indicative that persons employed as Seasonal Collection peon subsequent to employment of petitioner on the same post have been regularized in service.
7. Although the impugned order has rejected petitioner's candidature for regularization on the ground that he had not completed satisfactory work in four fasli but on account of subsequent developments that petitioner has now been in service since 1988, the said condition stands fulfilled. However with regard to second condition of petitioner being less than 45 years of age now does not cover the petitioner. For the said purpose, proviso to Rule 25 of the Rules of 2004 clearly indicate that relaxation can be granted by the State Government where operation of any rule regulating conditions of service of persons appointed on the service cause undue hardship in any particular case. In view of the aforesaid fact, it is apparent that while the first condition of petitioner having completed working in four fasli stands fulfilled, the conditions with regard to satisfactory work and for relaxation pertaining to the upper age limit can be granted only by State Government in terms of Rule 25 of Rules of 2004.
In view of aforesaid facts and subsequent developments, the petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party No.1 i.e. State of U.P. through Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow to take a decision with regard to regularization/recruitment of petitioner on the post of Collection peon in terms of Rule 5 read with Rule 25 of the U.P. Collection Peons Service Rules, 2004. Decision with regard to same shall be taken by the said authority within a period of eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced before the said authority who shall consider grant of regularization/recruitment to petitioner in terms of the said Rules from the date persons employed subsequent to petitioner have been granted such regularization/recruitment on the post of Collection Peon.
Order Date :- 12.2.2020 prabhat