BALAK RAM Vs. Y.S. PARMAR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has preferred this Letters Patents Appeal against the judgment of the Hon'ble Single Judge. The grievance of the petitioner is that the relief of regularization of his service against the post of Steno-typist/Computer operator w.e.f. September,1996, on which post the appellant has completed his ten years of regular service be granted to him.

(2.) IT is undisputed before us that the appellant has approached this Court twice. In CWP(T) No. 4812 of 2008 decided on 10th August, 2010, which is the subject matter of this appeal, this Court held:-

(3.) WE are unable to accept this contention more especially in view of the fact that the respondents themselves admit that the appellant had qualified the written/shorthand and typing test for the post of Steno-typist which was conducted in September, 1986. At that time, there was no regular vacancy and therefore, he was posted as Chowkidar. We also cannot accept the contention that his regularization cannot be made as subsequently in State of H.P. and others vs. Gehar Singh (2007)12 SCC 43 the Supreme Court considered the decision of Umadevi's case (supra) as also Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P. 1994 Supp (2) and held the directions issued in Mool Raj Upadhyaya's SCC 316 case as binding on the State. It is this decision which was subsequently applied by this Court in Gauri Dutt and others vs. State of H.P. Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366 where the directions were issued by this Court for regularization of employees. This Court held:-