JUDGMENT Amitava Lala and Sanjay Misra, JJ.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner in this writ petition challenged the judgment and order passed by the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow. Horn paragraph 27 onwards of such judgment, we find that reasons are given by the Tribunal. What would be the appropriate order to be passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that Seasonal Collection Amins for specific tenure have not acquired any right to Continue as Seasonal Collection Amin. Admittedly, such engagements were made seasonally but not continuously. The petitioner's position in such list of Seasonal Collection Amin was 60. The Tribunal has passed an affirmative order giving general made of appointment taking into account The Uttar Pradesh Collection Amins' Service Rules, 1974 as amended with effect from 23.10.1992. The order is very clear and distinct in respect of giving appointment, relaxation of age and other necessities. The order is dated 23.3.1999.
3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner he made a representation for his regular appointment finally in the year 1986 along with other subsequent representations. Even during the pendency of writ petition, a representation was made which was rejected. He says that as because of an order of the similar Tribunal dated 17.1.1990 such type of Collection Amins were given regular employment inspite of having been junior as per serial number he should be given regular appointment by an order of this court.
4. From the record it appears that the order dated 17.1.1990 was challenged before a writ jurisdiction of this court which was dismissed and a special application was made before the Supreme Court and the same was also dismissed. Therefore their services were confirmed. According to the petitioner, since those persons are juniors to him and since he has right of regularization or regular employment as per amended Rule of 1992, he should also get similar benefit.
5. According to us this court can not up set any order which has been reached to the finality even by the order of Supreme Court prior to amendment of relevant Rules. This court is only concern whether similar relief can be given in this writ petition and whether there is any other infirmity in the order of the Tribunal. We can not say that any appointment should be given de-hors the Rules. The petitioner's cause of action is subsisting when the Rules cam into force. The petitioner did not accrue any right of appointment on regular basis but only on seasonal appointment, nor such seasonal appointments give any right of seniority. Therefore, what is to be dune the same is to be only in accordance with Rules. Law says that if some body is active law helps him. If he is sleeping, law will be ineffective with him. The petitioner raised his voice only when he found that juniors to him, have got regular appointment. In any event the present position is not such that the petitioner will not get any appointment at all. The order of the Tribunal is totally affirmative in nature. The order has laid down a general principle for the purpose of regularization of any Seasonal Amin. Moreover the learned counsel appearing for the respondents contended that as per prevailing Rules, accommodation is made only in respect of three persons who are either under Scheduled Caste category or under O.B.C. category. The petitioner is at serial No. 5. He can be accommodated at the earliest and it is expected that this time appointment from the general category will have prevailing effect. We can at the best make time bound programme to fill - the vacancy within six months from the date of communication of this order. We can not accept other parts of submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he will get benefit of seniority retrospectively either for the service or for the retiral benefits. Till the time of regular appointment, if there is any necessity the State shall seek the services of the petitioner as Seasonal Collection Amin.
6. Therefore, the writ petition of the writ petitioner succeed partly in connection with giving appointment under general category at the earliest within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order. No other relief can be granted. The writ petition is disposed of. No order is passed as to costs.