IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1087 OF 2011 (S/S) Yashwant Singh ……………..Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ………Respondents. Present: Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand /respondents. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.(Oral) Heard Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents. The petitioner was engaged as a Draughtsman (Civil) on 01.08.1990 on a daily wage basis in Irrigation Department in the erstwhile State of Uttar Pradesh. Since the services of the petitioner were retrenched by the respondents vide order dated 01.09.1998, he raised an industrial dispute being Adjudication Case No. 79 of 2002, in which award was given in favour of the petitioner and he was taken back in service on 12.01.2005 by the respondents. Now according to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is continuing in the department on daily rate basis. He has now approached this Court stating that in view of Para 44 of the Constitution Bench Judgment of State of Karnataka and others Vs Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1, his services are liable to be regularized. In Paragraph 44 of the Uma Devi’s case, it has been stated that in case an employee has been continuing 2 for more than ten years without the strength of any interim order of a Court, and there is any scheme in the department for regularisation of services of such employee in the department, the regularisation may be considered as per the Scheme. As such, without expressing anything on the merits of the matter, this writ petition is being dismissed, as there is no occasion for interference in the matter though with liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority for regularisation, as stated above. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 24.08.2011 ASWAL