HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Writ Petition no. 215 (S/S) 2004 Nanda Ballabh Mishra S/o Sri Jai Dutt Mishra, R/o Behind Nirmala Convent School, Haldwani District Nainital. -----Petitioner. Vs. 1. Uttaranchal Power Corporation Ltd., Through Executive Engineer Electricity, Store Division, Haldwani, District Nainital, 2. Executive Engineer Electricity Store Division, Haldwani, Nainital, 3. Uttaranchal Power Corporation, Through its Deputy General Manager, Dehradun. -----Respondents. Sri V.B.S. Negi, Adv. and Sri Vikas Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri B.D. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents. Hon’ble M.M. Ghildiyal, J. Heard Sri Vikas Pandey, Adv. holding brief of Sri V.B.S. Negi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.D. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for regularization to the post of Coolie in Uttaranchal Power Corporation, Store Division, Haldwani. He has further prayed to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay minimum pay- scale as admissible according to law. The facts, as narrated by the petitioner, in brief are that the petitioner was appointed with the respondents as Daily Wager in the muster roll w.e.f. 19.11.1981 however his services were terminated on 31st Mach 1983. In a dispute referred by Notification no. 2327-30/CP-16-K/93 dated 31.03.1994 which was registered as Industrial Dispute no. 97 of 1994, the reference was made as under:- “Whether the termination of services of Sri Nanda Ballabh S/o Sri Jai Dutt Mishra, Daily Wager on muster roll by the employer with effect from 31.03.1983 is unjustified and illegal? if yes, to what benefit/relief the applicant/workman is entitled to and to what extent?” The Labour Court on 31.07.1997 has passed the Award in favour of the petitioner after taking in to account the Muster Roll and other evidence on record and found that the workman has completed 240 days with the respondent’s establishment in a calendar year. The Labour Court thereafter ordered for reinstatement of the petitioner being a daily wager employee, however, the wages for the intervening period were not granted by the Labour Court to the petitioner. The Award passed by the Labour Court was challenged by the respondents in writ petition no. 2761 (M/S) 2001 before this Court and this Court vide its order dated 04.10.2005 dismissed the writ petition and confirmed the Award passed by the Labour Court. It is true that the petitioner has not been provided benefit of payment of wages for the period since 1983 till 1997, however the Labour Court has granted continuity of service right from 1981. Counsel for the parties have not disputed that the petitioner was reinstated with the respondents and is working on daily wage basis after reinstatement since 1997. Since the petitioner has already served in the Department for a long period, it would be just and proper to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization as and when the posts are available with the respondents. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for his regularization. If the posts are not vacant, the petitioner’s case be considered for his regularization, as and when the posts are available with the respondents. With these directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of. No order as to costs. (M.M. Ghildiyal, J.) November 21, 2005: NCM: