Nath Bajpai Vs. Inspector General of Registration Uttar Pradesh & Anr
 INSC 539 (27
Agrawal, S.C. (J) Agrawal, S.C. (J) Jeevan Reddy, B.P. (J) S.C. Agrawal,
1996 AIR 674 JT 1995 (7) 128 1995 SCALE (5)624
appellant was appointed as Registration Clerk on daily wage basis by order
dated February 14, 1985. He had worked as Registration
Clerk on daily wage basis during various periods from February 14, 1985 to March 31, 1990.
services were not availed thereafter. The appellant filed a writ petition (writ
petition No. 849/95 [8030/90]) in the Allahabad High Court wherein he claimed
that he has been shown at serial No. 1 in the approved list of candidates
issued by the District Registrar, District Hardoi, and that the service of Pradyumna
Kumar and Maghad Prasad whose names were shown at serial Nos. 5 and 14
respectively in the said list have been regularised but the appellant has not
been regularised. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents
in the said writ petition in the High Court, it was not denied that persons
whose names were shown below the name of the appellant in the list of approved
candidates had been regularised but the appellant had not been appointed though
there was a vacancy in District Hardoi where he could be absorbed. The High
Court, on March 30,
1993, passed an
interim order directing that the appellant be paid regular scale of salary
which other Registration. Clerks were getting with effect from April 1, 1993. The grievance of the appellant is
that the writ petition of the appellant was heard by the High Court alongwith
special appeals and writ petitions of other Registration Clerks appointed on
daily wage basis and by the common judgment dated February 8, 1995 the writ petition of the appellant has been dismissed. The
learned counsel for the appellant has also placed reliance on the decision of
the High Court in Rajiv Kumar Shukla v. District Registrar, Hardoi & Ors.
(Writ Petition No. 6167 of 1990) dated July 2, 1990 wherein direction has been
given that the said Rajiv Kumar Shukla who was shown at serial No. 34 in the
approved list of candidates be considered for appointment according to rules
against the post which shall said become available in District Hardoi and in
pursuance of the said order he has been appointed on regular basis.
High Court while dismissing the writ petition of the appellant has not
considered the aforementioned facts relating to the case of the appellant. We are
of the opinion that the writ petition of the appellant should have been
considered by the High Court in the light of the circumstances referred to
appeal is, therefore, allowed, the judgment and order of the High Court dated
February 8, 1995 in so far as it relates to dismissal of writ petition No.
849/95 (8030/90) filed by the appellant is set aside and the said writ petition
is remitted to the High Court for consideration on merits. No costs.