RAJNISH KUMAR MISHRA & ORS. ETC. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. ETC.

Citation: [2019] 15 S.C.R. 68 · Decided: 13-12-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.A. BOBDE, BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI, SURYA KANT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
68
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 15 S.C.R.
RAJNISH KUMAR MISHRA & ORS. ETC.
v.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 9413-9414 of 2019)
DECEMBER 13, 2019
[S.A. BOBDE, CJI, B.R. GAVAI AND  SURYA KANT, JJ.]
Service Law – Regularisation – On creation of the Ambedkar
Nagar Judgeship, the appellants were appointed on ad-hoc basis –
In 2001, advertisement issued for direct recruitment of Class-III
employees – Appellants filed writ petitions – Order passed on
01.08.06 providing that appellants may also apply and their cases
shall be considered along with other candidates – However, the
said selection process was canceled and the appellants were
continued on the ad-hoc basis as per interim order dtd. 01.08.06 –
In the mean-time, the appellants represented to the District Judge,
Ambedkar Nagar for regularisation – District Judge constituted
Committee – It recommended regularization by report dtd.12.07.12
– District Judge regularised the services of the appellants – However,
the successor in the office of the District Judge inter alia declared
that the orders of regularization were non-est – Writ petitions
dismissed by the Single Judge – Appellants’ services terminated –
Appellants filed writ petition – Dismissed – Held: Report of the
Committee is on the basis of the Circular dtd. 05.11.09 issued by
the Registrar General of the High Court – Circular shows that all
the District Judges were directed that in order to restore the procedure
for appointment of Class III & Class IV employees, all such ad-hoc
daily wage appointees appointed subsequent to 31.12.01 without
following any procedure of law, must cease to work immediately –
During the pendency of the petitions, the Rules with regard to
regularization were amended which provided cut-off date of
31.12.01– Appellants were appointed prior to 31.12.01 – Change
in position of law ought to have been taken into consideration by
the High Court – Appellants continued in services from 01.08.06
on account of interim orders passed in writ petitions – As such,
when the appellants’ case was considered for regularization by the
 [2019] 15 S.C.R. 68
68
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
69
Committee, the appellants had put in service almost for 12 years –
Further, in view of the exception carved out in Umadevi case
providing for one-time regularization of employees who completed
10 years or above; the parity of similarly circumstanced employees
who were granted benefit in the Sheo Narain Nagar case and the
Rules amended in 2016 which provide cut-off date of 31.12.01, the
appellants are also entitled for regularization – Appellants be
reinstated with continuity in service for all the purposes including
terminal benefits, however, not entitled to back wages for the period
they are out of employment –Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Daily
Wages Appointments on Group ‘D’ Posts Rules, 2001.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The Circular addressed by the Registrar
General of the High Court of Allahabad dated 05.11.09 would
show, that all the District Judges have been directed that in order
to restore the procedure for appointment of Class III and Class
IV employees, all such ad-hoc daily wage appointees, who are
appointed subsequent to 31.12.01 without following any procedure
of law, must cease to work immediately. The said cut-off date is
provided in the said circular inasmuch as the provisions of Uttar
Pradesh Regularization of daily wages Appointments on Group
‘D’ Posts Rules, 2001 were notified on 31.12.01. The Committee
also found that all the appellants were appointed prior to 31.12.01;
they were in continuous service thereafter and their services
were satisfactory. In pursuance of the said report the District
Judge vide order dated 09.11.12 regularized the services of
appellants from 01.06.12. The report of the Committee under
the chairmanship of the Additional District Judge is mainly on
the basis of the Circular issued by the Registrar General of the
High Court dated 05.11.09. By the time when the cases of the
appellants for regularization had come up for consideration before
the Committee the Judgment of the Constitution Bench of this
Court in the case of Umadevi had already been pronounced. In
the said Judgment itself, the Constitution Bench had provided
that as a one-time measure the State should take up steps for
regularization of the employees, who had rendered the services
for a period of more than 10 years. [Paras 14-15][75-A-D, F-H]
RAJNISH KUMAR MISHRA & ORS. 

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