Court No.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 4408 of 2001 Shyam Singh and others …………….. Petitioners Versus Kumaun Jal Sansthan,Nainital through General Manager and others. ……………. Respondents …………………. Sri C.D.Bahuguna, learned counsel for the petitioners. Sri J.P.Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2. Sri H.M.Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.3. Date: Aug. 11,2008. Hon’ble P.C.Verma,J. The petitioners claim that they are working in Kumaon Jal Sansthan, District - Bageshwar as Chaukidar-cum-fitter. All of them have completed more than 10 years’ service. They have claimed minimum of pay scale and regularization of their services in the Kumaon Jal Sansthan. Petitioner Nos. 1, 6 & 7, namely, Shyam Singh, Guman Singh and Amar Ram have been working since the year1985, petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4, namely, Ram Singh, Balwant singh and Chinta Mani have been working since the year 1983, petitioner No.5- Ranjeet Singh has been working since the year 1984, petitioner No.8-Lal Singh has been working since the year 1986, petitioner No.9-Narain Singh has been working since the year 1988 and the petitioner No.10 2 Khim Singh has been working since the year 1990. In this way the petitioner Nos. 1 to 10 have been working continuously in the different water projects of Kumaon Jal Sansthan for the last 11 to 18 years respectively. The Jal Sansthan is paying only a fixed pay ranging from Rs. 250 - 350 per month to the petitioners, whereas it has been paying regular pay scale with all amenities of service to its regular employees working similar work. 2. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Kumaon Jal Sansthan, it has not been denied that the petitioners are working in the Jal Sansthan for the last several years. It has also been stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioners were engaged on consolidated amount of Rs. 250-350 per month though the respondents have not denied that the work is not of perennial nature. 4. Reliance has been placed on the judgment delivered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. versus Umadevi & others, reported in (2006) 4 Supreme Court Cases, Page 1 , wherein at Para 53, the Apex Court has been pleased to provide that those 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. Para 53 of the said judgment is reproduced as under:- “53. One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa (State of Mysore v. S.V. Narayanappa, (1967) 1 SCR 128), R.N. 3 Nanjundappa (R.N.Nanjundappa v. T.Thimmiah, (1972) 1 SCC 409) and B.N.Nagarajan (B.N.Nagarajan v. State of Karnataka, (1979) 4 SCC, 507) 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 above referred 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 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 4 making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme.” 6. Here in the present case, the petitioners have completed 11 to 18 years’ service and, therefore, in terms of the aforesaid observation made by the Apex Court, the petitioner’s case for regularization cannot be thrown out as laid down by the Apex Court in Umadevi’s case (supra). 7. The Apex Court in the Umadevi’s case (supra) at Para 55 also held that those engaged on daily wages be paid wages equal to the salary at the lowest grade of employees of their cadre in the Commercial Taxes Department in government service. 8. Since the petitioners have completed 11 to 18 years service respectively, therefore the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in consonance with the guidelines laid by the Apex Court in the aforesaid paragraphs of Umadevi’s case (supra) within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment. In the meantime, petitioners shall be paid salary equal to that of minimum of pay scale of Class IV. 9. With the aforesaid direction/observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. (P.C.Verma,J.) 11.08.2008 P.Singh 5