PRAGI LAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Agarwal, J. Heard Sri Ram Kishore Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

(2.) THE petitioners have approached this Court by filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order dated 18-12-2003 passed by the Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, U. P. P. W. D. , Hamirpur rejecting their representation claiming regularization on Class-IV post in U. P. P. W. D. on the ground that neither the petitioners have worked continuously for 240 days in any year nor have worked continuously for three years and, therefore, are not entitled for regularization as per the Engineer-in-Chief's letter dated 4-4-1989.

(3.) IN the absence of any statutory provision, thus, the petitioner in the instant case also cannot be given any benefit by directing the respondents to consider him for regularization which would be in the teeth of the law laid down in the aforesaid precedents.