High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
S.K.Dwivedi v. State Of U.P.And Others - WRIT - A No. 29696 of 1994  RD-AH 13136 (30 July 2007)
Court No. 26
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29696 of 1994
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi Versus State of U.P. and others
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran
The petitioner was initially engaged on 23.5.1990 on daily wage basis as Instructor Motor Mechanic in the respondent no.3-institute. By an order passed in the year 1990, the services of the petitioner were terminated. Challenging the said action of the respondents, the petitioner filed a writ petition in which an interim order was granted to the effect that until the services of the petitioner is validly terminated the petitioner will continue in service provided the vacancy continues. Pursuant thereto the petitioner continued in service. Thereafter by the impugned order dated 30.8.1994 the services of the petitioner had been terminated on the ground that he is involved in criminal activities. Challenging the said order dated 30.8.1994, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a further prayer to regularize his services.
By means of an interim order granted by this Court the petitioner is still continuing in service and is being paid his daily wages.
I have heard Sri Satish Chaturvedi and Sri Akhilesh Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as learned Standing counsel for the State-respondents. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at this stage.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that although some first information reports had been lodged against the petitioner but in all such cases he has been acquitted. Copies of the orders of acquittal have been filed along with the rejoinder affidavit. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is still continuing to work but his case for regularization has not been considered because of the pendency of this writ petition.
In view of the fact that the petitioner has been acquitted in all the cases and also keeping in view the fact that the impugned order had been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in my view the same deserves to be quashed. Since the case of regularization of other similarly situated persons has already been considered and that of the petitioner has not been done because of the pendency of this writ petition, in my view, the petitioner would also be entitled to be considered for regularization in terms of the relevant regularization rules.
Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. The order dated 30.8.1994 passed by Respondent no.3 is quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to him, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order before Respondent no.2. The petitioner shall also have the liberty to file a comprehensive representation with regard to his case before the Respondent no.2 annexing therewith all the relevant rules and the decision, if any, for being considered by the said respondent.
No order as to cost.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.