# State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, AIR - **Citation:** (2012) 2 ILRA 964 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2012-08-30 - **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41351 of 2012 - **Bench:** Sibghat Ullah Khan - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/state-of-haryana-v-piara-singh-air-42315 - **Pages:** 2 ## Headnote Code of Civil Procedure-Order 15 Rule-5striking out of defense-inspite of putting appearance on several adjourn datespetitioner/tenant failed to deposit the arrears of rent, for use and occupationconsequently defense struck of whichallowed to get finality-now on highly belated stage prayer for quashing entire proceeding can not be grantedconsidering long term of harassment of land lord as well as wastage of precious time of Court-with exemplary cost of Rs. 25000/ imposed-petition disposed of with direction first to deposit entire amount with cost on adjourn date then opportunity of cross examination be given. Held: Para 16 Under these circumstances, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is, hereby, dismissed with special cost of Rs.25,000/-. However, the learned Trial Court may exercise its discretion liberally, if the petitioner deposits entire amount of Rs.4,23,500/-, due as against him and the cost of Rs.25,000/- on the date fixed before the learned Trial Court ## Text 964 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2012 hereby quashed. The exercise for consequential benefits shall be carried out within three months from today. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 30.08.2012 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SIBGHAT ULLAH KHAN, J. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41351 of 2012 Swami Nath Pal ...Petitioner Versus State of U.P. & others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Ram Dawar Counsel for the Respondents: C.S.C. U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages appointment on Group-D post Rules 2001-Rule-4-regularization of daily wager working since 1993-admittedly working after cut of date-no direction could be issued-however considering long time working the government either consider regularization by amending rules or give preferential treatment by giving waitage in regular selection Held: Para 6 However, it is an alarming situation that for 19 years petitioner is working on daily wages basis. There must be thousands of such employees who are working on daily wage posts for more than ten years in different departments of Government of U.P. having been appointed after 29.06.1991. Government must take a decision either for regularising their services by amending the Rules of 2001 or by filling up the posts by regular appointment by providing due weightage to those employees who are working on daily wages basis for a long time particularly more than ten years. Case law discussed: 2001 (1) AWC 196; AIR 1992 SC 2130; AIR 2006 SC 1806 (Delivered by Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan, J.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a daily wage employee since 1993 in U.P. Irrigation Department posted at Jaunpur but his services have not been regularised. He is being paid increased pay-scale (Paragraph-9 of the writ petition) but he has not been regularised. The prayer is that respondents may be directed to regularise the services of the petitioner on the post of Beldar in the Department of Irrigation, Division Jaunpur. The second prayer is that salary under regular pay-scale may be directed to be paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon two authorities. One is of this Court reported in Betu Prasad Vs. State of U.P., 2001 (1) AWC 196 and the other is of the Supreme Court reported in State of Haryana Vs. Piara Singh, AIR 1992 SC 2130. However after the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Secretary, State of Kiarnataka Vs. Uma Devi AIR 2006 SC 1806, the scenario has completely changed. 3. State of U.P. has framed U.P. Regularisation of Daily Wages Appointment on Group-D Posts Rules, 2001., Rule-4 of which provides that only such daily wages employees can be regularised who were directly appointed on daily wage basis on Group-D posts in government service before June 29, 1991. As the petitioner was appointed in 1993 2 All] Mukesh Gupta V. Special Judge (P.C.Act) Lucknow and another 965 hence the said Rules cannot be applied to him. 4. Salary in regular pay-scale cannot be provided to daily wagers, however minimum salary must be paid and according to the own case of the petitioner the minimum salary is being paid to him since 2008 (para-9 and Annexure-V of the writ petition). 5. Accordingly, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. 6. However, it is an alarming situation that for 19 years petitioner is working on daily wages basis. There must be thousands of such employees who are working on daily wage posts for more than ten years in different departments of Government of U.P. having been appointed after 29.06.1991. Government must take a decision either for regularising their services by amending the Rules of 2001 or by filling up the posts by regular appointment by providing due weightage to those employees who are working on daily wages basis for a long time particularly more than ten years. 7. Office is directed to supply a copy of this order free of cost to Sri S.P. Mishra, learned standing counsel for sending the same to Principal Secretary, Irrigation and Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. --------- ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL SIDE DATED: LUCKNOW 22.08.2012 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SAEED-UZ-ZAMAN SIDDIQI, J. Rent Control No. - 73 of 2012 Mukesh Gupta ...Petitioner Versus Special Judge (P.C.Act) Lucknow and another ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Sudeep Kumar Sri Avdhesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Manish Kumar Sri Ankit Srivastava Code of Civil Procedure-Order 15 Rule-5striking out of defense-inspite of putting appearance on several adjourn datespetitioner/tenant failed to deposit the arrears of rent, for use and occupationconsequently defense struck of whichallowed to get finality-now on highly belated stage prayer for quashing entire proceeding can not be grantedconsidering long term of harassment of land lord as well as wastage of precious time of Court-with exemplary cost of Rs. 25000/ imposed-petition disposed of with direction first to deposit entire amount with cost on adjourn date then opportunity of cross examination be given. Held: Para 16 Under these circumstances, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is, hereby, dismissed with special cost of Rs.25,000/-. However, the learned Trial Court may exercise its discretion liberally, if the petitioner deposits entire amount of Rs.4,23,500/-, due as against him and the cost of Rs.25,000/- on the date fixed before the learned Trial Court