IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (SB) No. 1224 of 2002 Smt. Madhu Gupta. …….Petitioner. Versus Managing Director, Shivalik High School, Badshali Bagh, District – Saharanpur and others. …….Respondents. Dated : 17th June, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Heard Sri B.M. Pingal, holding brief of Sri Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gopal Narain, learned Brief Holder for State of Uttarakhand on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on daily wage basis in Shivalik High School in the month March, 1991 and she has completed more than 15 years of service and till date, she is working on the post. She has claimed the minimum pay scale and regularization of her services. In paragraph 5 of the short counter, respondents have submitted that minimum pay scale is being given to the petitioner vide order dated 18.07.2003. 3. Reliance has been placed on the judgment delivered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Umadevi & Ors. reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, wherein at para 53, the Hon’ble 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. The extract of para 53 is quoted below: “One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa, R.N. Nanjundappa and B.N. Nagarajan 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 subjudice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further bypassing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme.” 4. Here in the present case, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner has completed more than 15 years of service and is still working. Therefore, in terms of the aforesaid lines, the petitioner’s case for regularization may be considered, as laid down by the Apex Court in Umadevi’s case. 5. In view of the above legal proposition and the facts and circumstances as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is finally disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization, if petitioner is working for more than 10 years continuously and work and conduct of the petitioner is upto the mark, in consonance with the guidelines given by the Apex Court in Umadevi’s case, within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) SKS