Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Sri Balram Yadav, learned Counsel for the appellants and Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent on the question of admission of appeal. The Special Appeal has been filed against an order dated 1.5.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.324 (SS) of 2005, Ram Sudama Tiwari v. U. P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd. and others whereby the learned Writ Court quashed the order dated 8.4.2005 and directed the appellants to pass appropriate orders deeming the respondent to have been regularized on the post of Assistant Branch Clerk w.e.f. the date on which he was qualified for the said post. Consequential benefits in terms of regularization be also paid to the respondent. Brief fats of the present case are that the writ petitioner was earlier appointed in the U. P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd. in 1979 on ad hoc basis on a Class III post. Subsequently in the year 1991, the writ petitioner filed a claim petition before the Labour Court against the oral order of termination in which vide Award dated 11.12.1996, reinstatement of the writ petitioner was directed. The said Award was thereafter challenged in Writ Petition No.1794 of 1997 which was dismissed in the year 2015 as having become infructuous. During pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, the writ petitioner was reinstated in service by the Bank itself vide order dated 13.5.1997. He continued in service and subsequently superannuated on 31.8.2015. By order dated 8.4.2005, which was impugned in the writ petition, the regularization of the writ petitioner was rejected on the ground that he did not fulfil the educational qualification required to hold the post. During pendency of the writ petition, the matter pertaining to regularization of the writ petitioner was re-considered and vide order dated 27.2.2017, it was observed that he was fully eligible to be regularized on the post of Assistant Branch Clerk but no orders pertaining to his regularization has been passed. Learned Writ Court considering the aforesaid facts and events so also the order dated 8.4.2005, allowed the writ petition and directed as above. On due consideration of the aforesaid facts so also the order dated 27.2.2017 wherein the regularization of the writ petitioner was considered and it has been strictly recorded that the writ petitioner was fully eligible on the post of Assistant Branch Clerk, we are of the view that the learned Writ Court has rightly set aside the order dated 8.4.2005. No case is made out to interfere with the well-reasoned order passed by the learned Writ Court. The Special Appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
.
[Jaspreet Singh, J.] [Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, J.] Order Date :- 26.8.2019 lakshman .
.
.
Court No. - 1 C. M. Application No.94967 of 2019 in re:
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 348 of 2019 Appellant :- U.P.Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd.Lko.Throu.M.D.And Ors.
Respondent :- Ram Sudama Tiwari Counsel for Appellant :- Balram Yadava Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal,J.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Heard Sri Balram Yadav, learned Counsel for the applicants/appellants and Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent. The appeal is filed beyond 75 days.
As sufficient cause has been shown by the applicants, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Let the appeal be treated to be within time.
.
[Jaspreet Singh, J.] [Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, J.] Order Date :- 26.8.2019 lakshman