Civil Writ Petition No. 14806 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 14806 of 2007 Kumar Pal and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. J.S. Bedi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Raman B. Garg, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 & 2. RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioners are serving with the respondent- Department for the last 12 years as daily wagers. Their services were earlier terminated, but they were reinstated under the orders of the Court. Giving the details of their appointment and place of posting, the petitioners had approached this Court through various writ petitions, where this Court directed the respondent-Department to consider the representations/legal notices issued by the respective petitioners for their regularization by passing a well reasoned and speaking order within a period of 2 to 3 months. In terms of the said directions, the cases of the petitioners were considered for regularization. Counsel for the petitioners would refer to Annexures P-2 to P-7, where the decision was taken to Civil Writ Petition No. 14806 of 2007 -2- regularize the services of the petitioners, but the same could not be so done as no posts in Group D were lying vacant. The Secretary at that time had thereafter passed an order for awaiting the approval of the Government for Group D posts. Counsel for the petitioners refers to Annexure P-8 to show that the Government of Haryana had granted an approval and had conveyed creation of 85 posts purely temporary of Class IV in the pay scale of Rs.2550 -3200/- w.e.f. 1.10.2003 for regularizing the daily wagers employees. 253 posts of peons were also sanctioned and these posts were considered to be additional posts and no existing or future posts of peons were to be filled till the cadre strength again reaches the level of 253. Counsel for the petitioners, accordingly, contends that the submission made by the respondents and reliance on the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka Versus Uma Devi , 2006(4) SCC 1, will not be attracted to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. I see substance in the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners. Once this Court had issued direction much prior to the law as laid down in Uma Devi's case (supra) considering the petitioners eligible for regularization, the subsequent change of law may not defeat their rights in this regard. Not only this, a decision was taken to the effect that the petitioners be regularized. Even the posts have also been created. The petitioners till date are continuing on daily wages. Even the subsequent change of law especially would not make any difference as the observations made Civil Writ Petition No. 14806 of 2007 -3- in para 44 of the Uma Devi's case (supra), the case of the petitioners may still require consideration for regularization. In the light of Annexure P-7 & P-8 case for regularization is definitely made out. The present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for regularization in the light of directions issued by this Court earlier and also in view of the orders Annexures P-7 and P-8. Let the needful be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. January 24, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) monika JUDGE