SHIV SHANKAR SONKAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petitioner-appellant, aggrieved by judgment and order dated 21.04.2009 passed by a learned Judge in Civil Misc. WRIT Petition No. 66472 of 2006, has preferred this appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. Mr. Ram Autar Verma appears on behalf of the appellant. Respondents nos. 1 and 2 are represented by Mr. M.S. Pipersenia, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. Mr. Govind Krishna appears on behalf of respondents nos. 3 and 4. WRIT petitioner-appellant, hereinafter referred to as the ''appellant' filed an application for regularization of his service to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) in Nagar Palika Parishad, Azamgarh. The learned Judge, taking into account that the appellant had earlier filed writ petitions for the same relief, declined to interfere in the matter and dismissed the writ petition. In this connection, the relevant portion of the order passed by the learned Judge reads as follows:- "...Now this 8th round of litigation was initiated by the petitioner by filing the present writ petition No. 66472 of 2006 seeking the aforementioned reliefs. Heard Sri Shiv Shanker Sonekar in person, learned Standing Counsel and Sri Govind Krishna, learned counsel for the Nagar Palika Parishad, Azamgarh at length and perused the record. In fact the controversy raised by the petitioner has already been set at rest by this Court in the aforementioned judgments, copies of which have been placed on record. The writ petition is barred by the principles of res judicata. The petitioner ought to have avoided filing petition after petition of course after the verdict of Hon'ble Apex Court which has finally dismissed the special appeal filed by the petitioner. There is nothing left to be adjudicated after settling the controversy by the aforementioned Benches of this Court and Hon'ble Apex Court." Mr. Verma, appearing on behalf of the appellant, submits that after the dismissal of writ petitions and special appeals by the High Court and the Special Leave Petition by the Supreme Court, the process for regularization has been initiated and, therefore, a direction be given to take final decision in this regard. In this connection, he has drawn our attention to the communication dated 17th November, 2004 written by the Director, Local Bodies, Uttar Pradesh to the Deputy Secretary, U.P. Government, Urban Development Department-4, Lucknow. We have perused the said communication and from its perusal, it is not clear as to whether the informations sought for were furnished for the purpose of regularization of services of persons, whose names are mentioned in the list enclosed with the said letter. In view of the aforesaid, no positive direction can be issued to consider the case of the appellant for regularization. However, in case respondents take steps for regularizing the services of Junior Engineers like the appellant, the case for regularization of service of the appellant shall also be considered in accordance with law. Appeal stands dismissed with the observation aforesaid.