TARA SINGH BORA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. The grievance of the petitioner is that his services have not been regularized, whereas juniors to him were regularized. It has been stated by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis on the post of Khalasi, in the Forest Department, in the month of December, 1986 and since then he is continuously working on the said post either in the Forest Department or in the Forest Corporation. On 28th May, 2007, the petitioner preferred a representation narrating his grievances to the respondent No.2 to regularize his services on the post of Khalasi and pay him salary, but the respondents declined to regularize his services. Being aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner preferred the instant writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press the reliefs claimed in the writ petition, but restricts his prayer to the extent that the opposite parties be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization, as he had already put in two decades of service either in the Forest Department or in the Forest Corporation, to which learned Standing Counsel has no objection. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the opposite parties are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization, in accordance with law, within a maximum period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.