NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NARAYAN Shukla, J. Heard Mr. Y. S. Lohit learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 23-2-2005 contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, whereby the petitioners' representation for their regularization on Group 'd' post has been rejected and they have further prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the petitioners case for regularization on Group 'd' post and to pay them salary admissible to their counter-parts working on the regular establishment till such consideration for regularization is made.

(3.) THE Director on receipt of the representation sought opinion from the Personal Department in the matter which in turn sought information from the Government regarding cut off date 29-6-1991 mentioned in the Regularisation Rules of 2001, which in turn replied that no proceeding is pending consideration for cut off date 29-6-1991. Consequently the Director rejected their representation merely by saying that since no proceeding regarding cut off date 29-6-1991 is pending, the persons mentioned in the enclosed list working on daily wages are not entitled for their regularization.