GAJANAND AKHRAMKA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeks direction in the nature of mandamus requiring the opposite parties to consider the petitioner for regularisation after excluding certain adverse materials against him and a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing adverse material.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, Uttar Pradesh where he joined on 2nd Feb., 1973. He continued to work as an ad hoc Assistant Engineer. In May 1979 U.P. Regularisation of Ad hoc Appointments (on the posts within the Purview of the Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979 came into force. The petitioner along with other Assistant Engineers, who had been working on ad hoc basis, were considered under these Rules and a list was issued on 23rd Feb., 1980 whereby 181 Assistant Engineers were regularised. However the petitioner's name did not find place in the list. According to the petitioner he has been arbitrarily not regularised. One of the reasons given by him is that one entry made against him for the year 1978-79 was expunged in part by an order, passed by the Public Services Tribunal on 28.4.1992 while the other part of the entry was expunged by the Engineer-in-Chief on a representation, made by the petitioner by an order dated 5th June, 1992 but was considered in not regularisation.

(3.) In the counter-affidavit, filed on behalf of the State, it was stated that after the initial consideration for regularisation the opposite parties again reviewed the cases of the persons who had not been regularised earlier on 25th of June, 1982. In that selection also the petitioner was not found fit and was not selected for regularisation but his services were not terminated, because of an interim order passed in this case.