RAJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties at length. The present writ petitions have been filed for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to regularise the petitioners on the post of Draftsman or Forester in the Forest Department.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petitions are that petitioner Rajendra Singh Negi is working in the Garhwal Forest Division, Pauri since 1.3.89 as Draftsman. Similarly petitioner Dihesh Chand is working in Tons Forest Division since 1.8.1989 oh daily wages. The petitioners have stated that the Forest Department of State of Uttaranchal had published a list of daily wage employees who have been working prior to 29.6.1991. The names of the petitioners have also found place in the said list. The petitioners, were engaged on daily wages on Group 'C' post and also fulfil other necessary qualification for their regular appointment on the post of Draftsman/Forester in the Forest Department. The scheme of regularization of daily wagers class III group 'C employees has already been notified in 1998 but the respondent have, deliberately and wilfully delayed the matters to the detriment of the petitioners and other daily wages employees of this category.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners has also referred the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Stale of U.P. and Ors. v. Putti Lal : 2002 (1) ELC 524 (SC) : 2003 (96) FLR 252 (Alld.). In that case it has been held that daily wagers would be entitled to draw at the minimum of the pay scale being received by their counter part in the Government and the question of their regular absorption will obviously be dealt with in accordance with the statutory rule. The order is mutatis mutandis apply to the State of Uttaranchal as held by the Apex Court as under: So far as the State of Uttaranchal is concerned, a scheme for regularisation of daily workers has been produced before us which prima facie does not appear to be objectionable excepting the provision regarding qualification for regularisation. Be it sated that the qualification essential for being regularised would be the qualification as was relevant on the date a particular employee was taken in as a daily wager and not the qualification which is being fixed under the scheme. The fact that the employees have been allowed to continue for so many years indicates the existence or the necessity for having such posts. But still it would not be open for the Court to indicate as to how many posts would be created for the absorption of these daily wages workers. Needless to mention that the Appropriate Authority will consider the case of those daily wagers sympathetically who have discharged the duties for all these years to the satisfaction of their authority concerned. So far as the salary is concerned as we have stated in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh, a daily wager in the State of Uttaranchal would be also entitled to the san tin sum of the, pay scale as is available to his counter part in the Government until his services are regularised and he is given regular scale of pay.