Data Ram Verma and Others vs State of U.P. and Others

Rajiv Sharma, J.—Writ Petition No. 275 (SS) of 2000, has been filed for quashing the oral disengagement order 1.12.1999 and allowing the petitioners to work and pay them minimum scale, whereas the order passed by the opposite party No. 2 dated 14.7.2004 has been assailed in Writ Petition No. 4078 (SS) of 2004.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submit that all the petitioners were engaged during the period 1979 to 1987. Since then they are working intermittently, but continuously and have been paid wages. He submits that the petitioners and identically situated employees in the Forest Department have preferred writ petitions, on being disengaged, in this Hon''ble Court as well as at Lucknow Bench of this Hon''ble Court and by means of judgment and order dated 24th May, 1996, passed in Writ Petition No. 5442 (SB) of 1995 of this Court, this Court has directed for regularization of services of the daily wage employees. The said judgment and order was assailed by the State of U.P. before the Apex Court and the Apex Court dismissed S.L.Ps so preferred by the State of U.P. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the case of the State of U.P. and Others Vs. Putti Lal, , in respect of Forest Department employees, was decided by the Apex Court. In the said case of employees of Forest Department, this Court has provided, as an interim measure, for placing the employees in the minimum of the regular pay scale. The Apex Court while disposing of the SLP has observed as under:

Therefore, benefits of the said judgment of the learned Judge have to go to all the Daily Wagers/Muster Roll employees. It is admitted by the respondents that the pay at the rate as directed by the learned Judge in the said case, is being paid to those Daily Wagers who are members of Kumaun Van Shramik Sangh Centre and such payment is not being made to any other daily wager working anywhere in the State including in Kumaun hills. It is also admitted that the Scheme as directed by the leaned Judge has not been framed by the Government so far. The judgment of the learned Judge is binding on the Government and its functionaries. They are, therefore, bound to pay in terms of the said judgment to every daily rated labourers/muster roll employees and the Government is also bound to frame scheme for regularization of their service.

Thereafter, the State of U.P. has framed Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages Appointment on Group ''C'' Posts (Outside the Purview of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission) Rules, 1998 for regularization of category ''C'' employees in the year 1998 and the Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily Wages Appointments on Group ''D'' Posts Rules, 2001 for regularization of category ''D'' employee in the year 2001. On perusal of Rule 4 of the aforesaid Rules, it will be abundantly clear that a daily wage employee, who has been working on the cut off date, that is, 30th June, 1991 and has been working continuously on the proclamation of the notification of the aforesaid Rules shall be entitled for consideration of regularization of his services.

The aforesaid argument has been rebutted by the learned Standing Counsel on the grounds that the petitioners have working intermittently and not continuously from the cut off date till coming into force the aforesaid Rules in the year 2001.

Rule 4 of the Rules, 2001 has been interpreted by this Hon''ble Court in the case of Visheshwar v. Principal Secretary, Forest Anubhag-3 and Ors. (writ petition No. 47568 of 2002, decided on 29.11.2004) and this Court in the said case has held that in case the employee is working on the cut off date and is continuing as such on daily wage post on the date of proclamation of the notification of the aforesaid Rules, he is entitled for regularization, inspite of the fact that the employee worked intermittently.

In the instant case, the petitioners, as stated by counsel for the petitioners, were engaged during the period 1979 to 1987, though have worked intermittently, but on the cut off date i.e. 26th June 1991 as provided under the Rules they were working as daily wagers and further on coming into force of the Rules, 2001 and as such, in view of the provisions of Rule 4 of the said Rules, which specifically provides that the daily wager employees, who has been working on the cut off date and on the proclamation of the notification are entitled for consideration of regularization of his services and as such the petitioners are entitled for consideration of regularization of his services in view of the provisions of Rule 4 of the aforesaid Rules as interpreted by this Court in the case of Visheshwar (Supra).

While entertaining the writ petition No. 275 (SS) of 2000, this Court, vide order dated 20.1.2000 directed the opposite parties to allow the petitioners to continue to work and shall be paid minimum of the pay scale and shall also be considered for regularization within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

In compliance of this Court''s Order dated 22.1.2000, the case of the petitioners was considered and rejected by the impugned order dated 14.7.2004 is rejected.

Considering all the aspects of the matter in view, the opposite parties are directed to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization, under the U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointments on Group ''D'' Rules, 2001, ignoring the order dated 14.7.2004 passed in Writ Petition No. 4078 (SS) of 2004, within a maximum period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.

With these observations, both writ petitions succeed and are allowed.