IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.9602 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: JULY 03, 2009 Jai Parkash .....PETITIONER Versus Haryana Urban Development Authority and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL --- Present: Mr.Pawan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The services of the petitioner, who was initially appointed as E/Helper w.e.f. June, 1988 and was later on taken on TMR as Chowkidar w.e.f. January, 1989 to November, 1990, February, 1991 to June, 1994, were regularized as Chowkidar w.e.f. 19.3.1997 vide order dated 21.1.2004. Though the petitioner worked on TMR as Store Mate w.e.f. July, 1994 to August, 1994 and May, 1995, and Store Munshi w.e.f. September, 1995 to July, 1996, but his services were not regularized on the post of Store Munshi because at that time he was not eligible for the post of Store Munshi due to break in service for regular 240 days in a year. It is admitted position that the said order of regularization was not challenged by the petitioner though it is stated that the petitioner was not satisfied with the said order as his services were to be regularized on the post of Store Munshi. It is further admitted position that subsequently the petitioner was promoted as Store Munshi on 26.9.2005. It appears that after promotion of the petitioner as Store Munshi, the petitioner asked for re-regularization, as according to the petitioner he should have been regularized on the post of Store Munshi C.W.P. No.9602 of 2009 -2- w.e.f. 19.3.1997 as at the time of regularization of his services, he was working as Store Munshi. The claim of the petitioner for re-regularization of his services as Store Munshi w.e.f. 19.3.1997 has been rejected by the respondents vide order dated 25.3.2008 on the ground that when the services of the petitioner were regularized as Chowkidar w.e.f. 19.3.1997, he could not have been regularized as Store Munshi because at that time he was not eligible for the post of Store Munshi due to break in service for regular 240 days in a year; and secondly that in light of Chief Secretary, Haryana's letter dated 25.4.2007, the prayer for regularization cannot be considered at the belated stage. The petitioner has challenged the said order in the instant writ petition. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any ground for quashing the order dated 25.3.2008 whereby the prayer of the petitioner for re-regularization of his services has been rejected. If the petitioner was not satisfied with his regularization as Chowkidar w.e.f. 19.3.1997, he should have immediately challenged the said order. The cause of action arose to the petitioner in the year 2004, but he remained silent and did not challenge the action of the respondents in the Court, and after his promotion as Store Munshi on 26.9.2005, he asked for re-regularization. In my opinion, the respondents have rightly rejected the said claim which was made by the petitioner at the belated stage. Therefore, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order. No merits. Dismissed. July 03, 2009 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE