INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION U.P. AND ANR. versus AVDESH KUMAR AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 293 · Decided: 12-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION U.P. AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
AVDESH KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. 
APRIL 12, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
B 
Se1vice Laiv : 
U.P. Registration Depmtment (Dist1ict Establishment) Ministerial Ser-
vice Rules, 1978/U.P. Registration Manual: 
C 
Registration Clerks-Appointed on daily wage basis-Regulmisation 
of-Held all persons who were appointed either p1ior to 1.10.1986 or sub-
sequent to that date would continue on ad hoc basis till regular selections are 
1nade in the light of the directions given in Khagesh Kzunar's case-Selection 
Committee would suitably relax the age in the case of those workers who have D 
beconie over aged. 
Khagesh Kumar & Ors. v. Inspector General of Registration, [1995] 
Supp. 4 SCC 182, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7500 of E 
1996 Etc. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 22.4.92 of the High Court in 
Allahabad in C. Misc. W.P. No. Nil of 1992. 
D.V. Sehgal, A.B. Rohtagi, R.B. Misra, S. Kulshreshta, B.S.Jain, J.P. 
Singh, V.D. Khanna, U.S. Prasad, H.B. Misra, Manish Mohan, Sanjay 
Parikh, S.P. Singh, Rajkumar Gupta, H.P. Sharma Rajesh, B.B. Sawhney 
and Ajay K. Aggarwal for the appearing parties. 
The Following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Delay condoned. 
Leave granted. 
We have heard learned counsel on both sides. 
293 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
294 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
Various orders have been passed by the High Court directing the 
State either to continue the respondents till the regular selections are made 
or to give them appointment till the regular selections are made and to pay 
them the salary attached to those posts. The respondents came to be 
appointed on daily wage basis in the Registration Department of the Office 
of the Sub-Registrars in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The controversy raised 
in these cases is no longer res integra. In Khagesh Kumar & Ors. v. Inspector 
General of Registration, [1995] Supp. 4 SCC 182, a Bench of two Judges of 
this Court had gone into the controversy and given directions in paragraph 
24 thus : 
"For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment of the 
High Court is upheld with the following directions: 
(1) The petitioners or other similarly placed persons who were 
employed as Registration Clerks on daily-wage basis prior to 
1.10.1986 shall be considered on regularisation under the 
provisions of Rule 4 of the Regulararisation Rules provided they 
fulfil the requirements of Rule 4(1)(ii) and they have completed 
three years' continuous service. The said period of three years' 
service shall be computed by taking into account the actual period 
during which the employee had worked as Registration Clerk on 
daily-wage basis. The period during which such an employee has 
performed the duties of Registration Clerk under Paragraph 101 
of the Manual shall be counted as part of service for the purpose 
of such regularisation. 
(2) In the event of appointment on regular basis on the post of 
Registration Clerks, the petitioners or other similarly placed per-
sons who had worked as Registration Clerks on daily-wage basis 
may be given one opportunity of being considered for such ap-
pointment and they be given relaxation in the matter of age 
requirement prescrihed for such appointment under the Rules. 
(3) The Subordinate Services Selection Commission while making 
selection for regular appointment to the posts of Registration 
Clerks shall given weightage for their experience to the Registra-
tion Clerks who have worked on daily-wage basis and shall frame 
suitable guidelines for that purpose. 
( 4) If any of the petitioners or other similarly placed person was 
INSPECTOR GEN. OF REGISTRATION U.P. v. A VD ESH KUMAR 295 
required to perform the duties of Registration Clerk as an appren-
A 
tice under paragraph 101 of the Manual, he may submit a repre-
sentation to the appropriate authority setting out the full 
particulars of such employment within three months and the 
authority concerned, after verifying the correctness of the said 
claim, shall pass the necessary order for payment of emoluments B 
on daily-wage basis for the period he is found to have so worked 
on the post of Registration Clerk. The said payment shall be made 
within a period of three months from the date of submission of the 
representation.
11 
In some of these cases also, the respondents came to be appointed C 
subsequent to October l, 1986 and they are seeking the sam

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.