KUSHLANAND NAUTIYAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri R.C. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anil Saran, learned Standing Counsel, Sri I.H. Farooqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for Union of India and Sri Pradeep Chandola, learned Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.

(2.) By means of present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 07.08.2009 passed by the Union of India on the basis of recommendations of State of Advisory Committee dated 20.02.2009 and 09.04.2009 in its 68th and 69th meetings, by which the petitioner, who is working on the post of Publicity Inspector is sought to be transferred from the State of U.P. to the State of Uttarakhand alongwith other persons, who are posted and working on the post of Cane Development Inspector. The petitioner is also challenging the consequential order of the State Government dated 27.08.2009 issued in furtherance of the order dated 07.08.2009, by which directions have been issued to the Cane Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow to comply with the order dated 07.08.2009 and subsequently, the Additional Cane Commissioner (Administration) issued a letter to all Deputy Cane Commissioner of the Region on 13.01.2009 to relieve the employees, who have been allocated to the State of Uttarakhand immediately. The petitioner has also assailed the consequential order dated 24.10.2009 issued by the Deputy Cane Commissioner, Lucknow Region, Lucknow directing the petitioners to get himself relieved and submit his joining to the State of Uttarakhand in compliance of the orders of the State Government dated 14.10.2009 and 27.08.2009.

(3.) The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was initially appointed in Subordinate Cane Service Group-II in the pay scale of Rs. 280-450 alongwith other admissible allowances on ad-hoc basis vide order dated 10.02.1977. At the time of petitioner's appointment, there were no rules governing conditions of service and the statutory rules i.e. U.P. Subordinate Cane Group-I & II General) Service Rules, 1979 promulgated and notified by the State Government on 19.06.1979 and before that no requisite qualification was prescribed for appointment in Group-D Subordinate Cane Service and before January, 1979 appointments were made of persons having different qualifications. As the petitioner was appointed on 10th February, 1977 on ad-hoc basis, as such, his services were required to be considered for regularization under U.P. Regularization of Ad-hoc Service Rules, 1979 as amended from time to time. Since the Cane Commissioner U.P. has not taken any steps for regularization of the service of the petitioner even after passing of 16 years, the petitioner alongwith four others were constrained to approach U.P. State Public Service Tribunal by means of Claim Petition No. 585 of 1994, Kushlanand Nautiyal and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. and vide judgment and order dated 05.02.1997 the claim petition was allowed with the directions to the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioners' for their regularization according to existing rules and also determine the seniority in their cadre according to existing rules within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the judgment by the opposite parties. When the judgment and order dated 05.02.1997 of the learned Tribunal was not complied the claim-petitioners preferred a Contempt Petition No. 08 of 1998, Kushlanand Nautiya and Ors. v. Shri Siddhartha Behura and Ors..