COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) 1978/2003 Mahiman Singh Bhandari …….Petitioner Versus State of Uttaranchal & Others …….Respondents Sri Lalit Samant, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 15th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize his services on Class IV post and to pay him the minimum salary of Class IV post. 2. Petitioner claims that he is continuously working on daily wages in the Department of Rural Engineering Service since the year 1990. He made several representations for regularization of his services and Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering Services, Uttaranchal also sent a letter on 2.5.2002 to respondent no. 3/Executive Engineer, Chamoli for regularization of the services of the petitioner. It has also been averred that vacancies in class posts are available in the department. 3. In the counter affidavit, respondents have denied that the petitioner is working since 1990, but it has been admitted that he is working since 1994. But petitioner 2 has filed an experience certificate, which is annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the rejoinder affidavit, issued by the Assistant Engineer, Chamoli which certifies that the petitioner is working since 1991. 4. Reliance has been placed on the judgment delivered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Umadevi & Ors. reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, wherein at para 53, the Hon’ble Apex Court has been pleased to provide that those temporary employees or daily wagers who have put in service of ten years or more, for them appropriate scheme shall be framed and they shall be regularized in phased manner. The extract of para 53 is quoted below: “One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa, R.N. Nanjundappa and B.N. Nagarajan and referred to in para 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of the courts or of tribunals. The question of regularization of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases abovereferred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularize as a one-time measure, the 3 services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularization, if any already made, but not sub judice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further bypassing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme.” 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and above legal proposition, the writ petition is finally disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in consonance with the guidelines given by the Apex Court in Umadevi’s case within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. In the meantime, petitioner shall be paid salary equal to that of minimum of pay scale of the Class IV post. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 15.7.2008 Prabodh