JITENDRA PRAKASH PANDEY Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE LUCKNOW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. L.P. Misra, learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, appearing for the State and perused the record.

(2.) This special appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated February 17, 2010, passed by the learned single Judge, dismissing the Writ Petition No. 3 (S/S)/1996 and connected Writ Petition No. 3519 (S/S)/2008, Jitendra Prakash Pandey v. State of U.P. and Ors. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the Appellant was engaged on daily wage basis as Class-IV employee w.e.f. September 1, 1994 in the establishment of the opposite parties i.e. Board of Revenue, Lucknow. He was not allowed to perform his work w.e.f. November 17, 1995. Feeling aggrieved he filed Writ Petition No. 3 (S/S)/1996, in which this Court had passed an interim order dated January 3, 1996. On the basis of the said interim order, the Appellant-Petitioner continued to work. However, suddenly the service of the Appellant-Petitioner was terminated by order dated April 21, 2008, against which he filed Writ Petition No. 3519 (S/S)/2008. By the impugned judgment and order, both the aforesaid writ petitions were heard together and dismissed on February 17, 2010.

(3.) Dr. L.P. Misra, learned Counsel for the, Appellant has vehemently submitted that a number of persons having been engaged as Class-IV employees on daily wage basis subsequent to the engagement of the Appellant, have been retained and regularized in the, service in the establishment of the Respondents,' but the Appellant has been subjected to the hostile discrimination and thereby the Appellant's right of equality guaranteed to him under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, has been violated and this crucial aspect of the matter has been ignored by the learned single Judge while passing the judgment and order.