KAMALUDDIN Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 and Sri Arun Kumar, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2. The petitioner by means of the present writ petition has assailed the order dtd. 22/2/2021 by which claim of petitioner for grant of pensionary benefits and other retiral dues has been rejected.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he has been appointed as daily wager Clerk by Deputy Administrator by order dtd. 14/6/1989. As the petitioner had been in service since before 11/10/1989, therefore, his services has been regularised by order dtd. 22/9/2008. The petitioner has retired on 31/8/2018.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has continued in service since 1989, therefore, his services rendered as daily wager from 14/6/1989 till the date of regularisation is liable to be counted with regular service for the purpose of grant of retiral dues. The aforesaid contention has been advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner on the basis of judgment of Apex Court in the case of Prem Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others,2020 (164) FLR 671 (SC).and judgment of this Court in the case of Kaushal Kishore Chaubey and others v. State of U.P. and others, in Writ-A No. 5817 of 2020. Accordingly, it is submitted that impugned order is not sustainable in law.