AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:-
i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned regularization order dated 13.09.2012 so far it concern to the petitioner it relates to date of regularization.
ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the final seniority list dated 28.05.2013 so far concerned to candidates situated at serial no. 2, 3 and 43 and meanwhile keep in abeyance for giving effect in regard to promotion, seniority and other decisions of the respondents in the department which will be effect against the petitioner and further prayed to pass the same order in the tune of order dated (Annexure no. 10 to the writ petition)
iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to rectify the regularization order dated 13.05.2013 and final seniority list dated 28.05.2013 so far candidates standing at serial no. 2, 3, and 43.
iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularizes the services of the petitioner as per provision of regularization rules dated 05.07.2002 (annexure no. 8) v) Award any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. vi) Award the cost of writ petition in favour of the petitioner.
According to petitioner, he was appointed as L.T.
Grade Teacher on ad-hoc basis in Ashram Type Ucchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya run by Social Welfare Department on 30.07.1987. His services were subsequently regularized with immediate effect vide order dated 13.09.2012. This writ petition has been filed for preponing the date of regularisation.
A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the petitioner annexing therewith copy of an order dated 24.05.2017 passed by respondent No. 3, which indicates that date of regularisation of the petitioner has now been preponed to 30.07.1990.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that date of regularisation of the petitioner has been preponed in terms of Regularisation of Ad-hoc Appointments (Outside the Purview of Public Service) Rules, 2002 notified on 05.07.2002. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Rule 4(3) of the said Rule in support of his contention.
I am afraid that the said provision provides otherwise. Without expressing any further opinion on the issue, the writ petition is disposed of since the relief sought by the petitioner has been granted by the Competent Authority.