S C KANAUJIA Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List revised. None has appeared for the petitioner. However, I have perused the record.

(2.) The petitioner has sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay salary to the petitioner at par with the regular/permanent Junior Engineer and also to consider the petitioner for regularisation. It appears that the petitioner was engaged as Junior Engineer on 6.12.1983 by the General Manager, Kanpur Jal Sansthan, Kanpur on daily wage basis at fixed wages for a period of three months. The said engagement continued from time to time. Relying on Government Order dated 6,7.1978 the petitioner claimed for consideration for regularisation having worked for more than three years and having worked for 240 days in a year. However, I find no merit in the petition.

(3.) A perusal of the Government Order dated 6th July 1978 shows that the same was issued in respect to the employees of Nagar Mahapalikas and the Government sought proposal from the concerned Nagar Mahapalika for creation of regular posts. There is nothing on record to show as to how the said Government Order is applicable to Jal Sansthan which is an independent statutory body constituted under Section 18 of the U.P. Water Supply Sewerage Act 1975. Besides, the recruitment to the post of Junior Engineer, Jal Sansthan is governed by the statutory rules framed under the aforesaid Act, which for the purpose of direct recruitment require advertisement of vacancy, inviting applications from all eligible persons so as to comply with the requirement of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. In the absence of any statutory provision the claim of the petitioner for regularisation cannot be directed to be considered in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in Secretary, State ofKarnataka v. Uma Devi, (2006) 4 SCC1.