Court No. - 55
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 769 of 2019 Appellant :- Raghubar Dayal And 2 Others Respondent :- Uttar Pradesh Council Of Sugarcane Research And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Prasad Mishra,Surendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Siddhartha Singh With Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 773 of 2019 Appellant :- Baghish Chandra Mishra Respondent :- Uttar Pradesh Council Of Sugarcane Research And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Prasad Mishra,Surendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Siddhartha Singh
Hon'ble Vikram Nath,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Order on Delay Condonation Application of both the appeals There is a delay of 130 days in filing the Special Appeal (Defective) No. 769 of 2019 and 129 days in filing the Special Appeal (Defective) No. 773 of 2019. These applications have been filed to condone the delay.
Cause shown for the delay has been satisfactorily explained.
There is no objection from the side of the respondents.
Delay condonation applications are allowed and the delay in filing the appeals is condoned.
Let the appeals be registered on regular side.
Order on Appeal Heard Sri Rajendra Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Siddhartha Singh, learned counsel representing respondents in both the appeals.
With the consent of the parties, the appeals have been heard.
The present appeal arises out of the judgement and order dated 13.3.2019, passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition seeking regularisation of the petitioner, who was working as a daily wager, has been dismissed.
The counsel for the appellant has stated that in terms of the regularisation scheme several other persons, who were similarly situated, have been regularised and the claim of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was based upon violation of Article 14 inasmuch as persons juniors to the appellant had been regularised and this aspect of the matter has not even been adverted to in the impugned judgement.
A perusal of the impugned judgement shows that the Single Judge was of the view that appointment of the petitioner on daily wages was without any procedure and thus no right accrued in favour of the petitioner, however, this aspect of the matter that persons, junior to the appellant, had been regularised, has not even been considered by the learned Single Judge.
In view of the said submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, the appeal deserves to be allowed. The judgement and order dated 13.3.2019 is set aside and the matter is remanded before the learned Single Judge for fresh decision.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the order passed above.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Puspendra .
(Pankaj Bhatia,J.) (Vikram Nath,J.)