Shripal vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 9485 of 2023
Shripal
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ramendra Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
AFR
Court No. - 34
(Sl.No.348.14)
HON'BLE ANISH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner today in Court,
is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Ramendra Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri
Pradeept Kumar Shahi, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel
assisted by Sri Pradeep Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
3. The instant petition has been filed with the following prayer:
"I. Issue a writ order of direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the
order dated 21.01.2023 passed by Office of Prabhagiya Vanadhikari,
Pilibhit Tiger Riserve Pilibhit i.e. respondent no.3,
II. Issue a writ order of direction in the nature of mandamus commanding
to the respondents to pay minimum of the pay scale to the petitioner in the
light of Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shobha
Shanker Dubey and Mohan Swaroop and others cases bearing no. Civil
appeal no. 10956 of 2018 and Civil misc. writ petition no.11964 of 2018
order dated 14.11.2018 and 17.11.2018.
III. Issue a writ order of direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondent no.3 to regularized the petitioner in the
aforesaid post.
IV. Issue a writ order of direction in the nature of mandamus
commanding to the respondents to consider and decide the representation

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
2
dated 22.03.2023 filed by the petitioner within specific time granted by
this Hon'ble Court (Annexure no2) to this writ petition."
4. In the instant petition, the petitioner has claimed that he was engaged
on daily wages by the Forest Department from February 2015 and since
then, he is continuously working. Previously, the petitioner had filed
Writ-A No. 20449 of 2022 (Shri Pal vs. State of UP and 3 others), which
was disposed of by order dated 08.12.2022 directing the respondents to
consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of minimum pay scale within
a period of three months. Thereafter, vide order dated 21.01.2023, the
claim for regularization of the petitioner was rejected as he was not
eligible in terms of Uttar Pradesh Regularization of Persons Working on
Daily Wages, Work Charge, or Contract in Government Departments
(Group C & D Posts) Rules, 2016 (in short, 'Rules, 2016') for
regularization.
5. So far as the prayer of the petitioner with regard to regularization is
concerned, from the admitted facts, the petitioner is not eligible for
regularization in terms of 2016 Rules. Accordingly, this Court do not find
any illegality in the impugned order dated 21.01.2023.
6. However, the petitioner has also claimed that he should be granted the
minimum pay scale as he has completed 10 years continuous service with
the Forest Department. Though, he is not eligible for regularization but
since the respondents have already granted the minimum pay scale to the
persons, who have completed 10 years of continuous service vide office
memo dated 24.09.2024. However, in that Office Memo, a cutoff date of
09.11.2023 has been fixed by the respondents.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is
also a similarly situated person and no artificial cutoff date can be fixed in
such matters for grant of minimum pay scale to some individuals, who
have completed 10 years service up to 09.11.2023, but the persons who
are completing 10 years service after 09.11.2023 can be denied the grant
of minimum pay scale. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that since the petitioner has completed the 10 years of
continuous service, therefore, the minimum pay scale should be accorded

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
3
to the petitioner.
8. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State relies upon
the office memo dated 24.09.2024 and submits that in the said office
memo, the basis for grant of minimum pay scale is 10 years continuous
service to the persons as daily wagers or Class IV employees. However,
the said date 09.11.2023 was fixed in terms of the order dated 09.11.2023
passed by this Court in the lead matter being Writ-A No. 9383 of 2023
(Vijay Kumar Srivastava vs. State of UP and 2 others). However, the
Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that since the cutoff date has
been fixed by the department, so every person who has completed 10
years continuous service on 09.11.2023 has been granted a minimum pay
scale. Since the petitioner has not completed 10 years continuous service
as on 09.11.2023, he is not eligible and entitled for grant of minimum pay
scale.
9. Having heard the rival submissions so made by the learned counsel for
the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case.
From the perusal of the background of the instant cases, which has been
previously settled by the Apex Court in State of U.P. vs. Putti Lal, 2006
it is apparent that since there were no effective
(9) SCC 337,
regularization rules and the candidates who were working since long and
when the regularization rules were framed and implementation thereof
was awaited, the Apex Court has provided vide its judgment dated
21.02.2002 that all such candidates who are eligible for regularization in
terms of Uttar Pradesh Regularisation of Daily Wages Appointments on
Group 'D' Posts Rules, 2001 (in short, 'Rules, 2001'), but could not be
regularized or the regularization process is still incomplete, they shall be
granted the minimum pay scale. Subsequently, 2016 Rules were also
brought by the State Government, which provided the period of service
from particular dates to make a person eligible for regularization and
since thereafter, though no further rules with regard to regularization are
available. In 2001 Rules, the provision was that a person who is working
since prior to 29.06.1991 and continuously working till 21.12.2001, is
eligible for regularization and in terms of judgment of Putti Lal (supra) ,
till the consideration of his claim for regularization, he is entitled for
minimum pay scale.

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
4
10. Likewise it is provided in the 2016 Rules that a person who is
working prior to 31.12.2001 till 12.09.2016, he is eligible for
regularization in terms of 2016 Rules. Due to various directions passed in
the lead matter i.e. Writ-A No. 9383 of 2023 (Vijay Kumar Srivastava vs.
State of UP and 2 others), repeatedly this Court has asked the State
Government to frame the policy with regard to the grant of minimum pay
scale as well.
11. In terms of the aforesaid directions, the respondents have come up
with the office memo dated 24.09.2024 and has provided that any
candidate who has continuously worked for 10 years or 20 years as on
09.11.2023, the cutoff date, he would be entitled for grant of minimum
pay scale. Thus, from the cumulative understanding of 2001 rules, 2016
Rules and directions issued by the Apex Court in Putti Lal's case and the
office memo dated 24.09.2024, the rationale behind grant of minimum
pay scale is that the persons, who are continuously working since long
period and were eligible for regularization, the direction is to grant
minimum pay scale to them. The rationale behind the office memo dated
24.09.2024 appears to be reasonable enough to grant the minimum pay
scale to each and every person who has completed 10-20 years of
continuous service. However, in the said Office Memo dated 24.09.2024,
the cutoff date of 09.11.2023 appears to have been fixed without any
rationale behind it as it was issued to fill up the gap till the policy is
framed by the State. For ready reference, the office memo dated
24.09.2024 is being reproduced herein under:
"
मा० सर्वोच्च न्यायालय एवं उच न्यायालय के विभिन्न रिट याचिकाओं में पारित आदेशों के
अनुपालन में वन विभाग, उत्तर प्रदेश में कार्यरत दैनिक श्रमिकों को वेतनमान का न्यूनतम
Guidelines).
अनुमन्य करने सम्बन्धी दिशा-निर्देश (
मा० सर्वोच न्यायालय एवं मा० उच्च न्यायालय, इलाहाबाद के आदेशों के समादर में प्रधान
मुख्य वन संरक्षक एवं विभागाध्यक्ष से हुए विचारोपरान्त, दैनिक श्रमिक जो 10 वर्षों से अधिक
समय से कार्यरत है, को वेतनमान का न्यूनतम दिये जाने के सम्बन्ध में, चूंकि नीति बनने में

समस्त विभागों से विचार विर्मश करने में समय लगने की संभावना है, अतः मा० सर्वोच्च
न्यायालय/उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश के क्रम में नीति के सम्बन्ध में निर्णय लिये जाने/निर्गत होने
तक वन विभाग निम्नवत एक गाइड लाइन्स निर्गत करता है, जिससे मा० न्यायालय के आदेशों

की अवहेलना न हो ।
2-
उपरोक्त के दृष्टिगत वन विभाग में 10 से 20 या अधिक वषों से कार्यरत श्रमिकों को

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
5
वेतनमान का न्यूनतम अनुमन्य किये जाने के सम्वन्ध में निम्न दिशा-निर्देश निर्गत किये जा रहे

हैः-
1.
मा० उच्च न्यायालय, इलाहाबाद में रिट याचिका संख्या-ए 9383/2023 विजय कुमार
श्रीवास्तव बनाम उ०प्र० राज्यादि में पारित आदेश के दिनांक 09.11.2023 से 10 वर्ष या
इससे पूर्व से कार्यरत तथा उक्त तिथि 09.11.2023 के उपरान्त भी कार्यरत रहे, ऐसे समस्त
(वन विभाग द्वारा लगभग 3209 की संख्या बतायी गयी है) समान स्थिति वाले दैनिक श्रमिकों
minimum of the pay scale)
को वेतनमान का न्यूनतम वेतन ( रूपया 18,000/- (रूपया
अठारह हजार केवल) की धनराशि दिया जाय। सम्वन्धित प्रभागीय वनाधिकारी अपने स्तर से

तत्काल उक्त धनराशि दिया जाना सुनिश्चित करेंगे, जो कि इसके लिये अधिकृत है।
2.
दैनिक श्रमिको को कार्य एवं बजट के आधार पर प्रभागीय वनाधिकारी/प्रभागीय निदेशक
Pick and choose) '
द्वारा रखा जाता है। अतः उनके द्वारा किसी प्रकार की पक्षपातपूर्ण (
Equal Treatment
कार्यवाही नहीं की जाय। ऐसे सभी मामलों में दिया जाय और मा०

न्यायालयों के आदेशों की अवमानना की स्थिति नहीं आनी चाहिए।
3.
प्रभागीय वनाधिकारी/प्रभागीय निदेशक ऐसे सम्बन्धित श्रमिक की कार्यरत रहने की अवधि
की सत्यापन उपरान्त न्यूनतम वेतन के समतुल्य धनराशि अनुमन्य/भुगतान किया जाना

सुनिश्चित करेंगे।
4.
मा० न्यायालय के आदेशों की अवमानना की स्थिति में सम्बन्धित प्रभागीय

वनाधिकारी/प्रभागीय निदेशक स्वयं व्यक्तिगत रूप से जिम्मेदार होंगे।
उपरोक्त गाइड लाइन्स (दिशा निर्देश) तात्कालिक प्रभाव से लागू होंगे।"
12. In Putti Lal (supra) , the Apex Court has made the following
observations with regard to payment of minimum pay scale :
On behalf of the employees an IA had been filed claiming that they
"3.
should at least be allowed their regular wages during the pendency of the
appeals, but by order dated 27-9-1999 that prayer was rejected and it
was held that the persons working will be paid only the amount payable
to a daily-wager. When these matters had been posted for hearing before
the Court on 1-5-2001, after hearing the parties for a considerable length
of time, the Court felt that the impugned direction of the High Court for
providing a scheme for regularisation of all the daily-wage
workers/muster-roll employees under the Forest Department who have
rendered 10 years of service or more, should be regularised by making
appropriate scheme. The Court directed that the scheme should be framed
within three months from the date of the order. As the State of U.P. was
bifurcated into two States and the State of Uttaranchal had come into
existence, by a subsequent order the State of Uttaranchal was also
impleaded as a party and it had been granted time to file its response.
Pursuant to the aforesaid direction of the Court dated 1-5-2001 the State

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
6
of U.P. has framed a set of rules in exercise of power conferred under the
proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution called “the Uttar Pradesh
Regularisation of Daily Wagers (Appointment on Group ‘D’ Posts) Rules,
2001”. It appears that a similar rule has been framed for regularisation
of Group ‘C’ daily-wage employees. Both these statutory rules would
govern the case of all daily-wagers appointed in any department
including the Forest Department, which Department was before us
pursuant to the direction of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High
Court. Since a statutory rule has been framed indicating the manner in
which the daily-wagers can be regularised, question of framing any
further scheme by the State of Uttar Pradesh does not arise.
4. Mr Bahuguna, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the employees,
made a grievance with regard to some of the provisions of the aforesaid
Rules but we are not inclined to entertain that grievance and issue any
direction in this case inasmuch as grievance, if any, emanating from the
aforesaid statutory rules would be on a fresh cause of action which could
be assailed before an appropriate forum by the aggrieved party. Mr
Bahuguna, however, contended that so far as the entitlement of these
daily-wagers until they are regularised in accordance with the statutory
rule to get minimum of the pay scale is concerned, should be granted by
this Court which is not being given because of the interim order of stay
that had been passed by this Court and the dismissal of the IA filed by the
employees. According to him, a judgment of a learned Single Judge in
respect of the Forest Department employees unequivocally held that the
daily-wagers should be paid in the minimum of the pay scale as is
available to a regularly employed worker in the corresponding cadre.
5. In several cases this Court applying the principle of equal pay for
equal work has held that a daily-wager, if he is discharging the similar
duties as those in the regular employment of the Government, should at
least be entitled to receive the minimum of the pay scale though he might
not be entitled to any increment or any other allowance that is
permissible to his counterpart in the Government. In our opinion that
would be the correct position and we, therefore, direct that these daily-
wagers would be entitled to draw at the minimum of the pay scale being
received by their counterparts in the Government and would not be
entitled to any other allowances or increment so long as they continue as
daily-wagers. The question of their regular absorption will obviously be
dealt with in accordance with the statutory rules already referred to.
6. So far as the State of Uttaranchal is concerned, a scheme for

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
7
regularisation of daily workers has been produced before us which prima
facie does not appear to be objectionable excepting the provision
regarding qualification for regularisation. Be it stated that the
qualification essential for being regularised would be the qualification as
was relevant on the date a particular employee was taken in as a daily-
wager and not the qualification which is being fixed under the scheme.
The fact that the employees have been allowed to continue for so many
years indicates the existence or the necessity for having such posts. But
still it would not be open for the Court to b indicate as to how many posts
would be created for the absorption of these daily-wage workers.
Needless to mention that the appropriate authority will consider the case
of these daily-wagers sympathetically who have discharged the duties for
all these years to the satisfaction of their authority concerned. So far as
the salary is concerned, as we have stated in the case of the State of Uttar
Pradesh, a daily-wager in the State of Uttaranchal would be also entitled
to the minimum of the pay scale as is available to his counterpart in the
Government until his services are regularised and he is given regular
scale of pay."
13. From the aforesaid observations as made in Putti Lal (supra), it is
apparent that the persons who are eligible for regularization in terms of
2001 Rules and their claim for regularization could not be considered and
it will take some time to finalize the claim for regularization.In such
circumstances, the Apex Court has directed that all such candidates would
be entitled for grant of minimum pay scale instead of the minimum
wages, which were being paid to such candidates. 2001 Regularization
Rules had provided the cutoff date from 29.06.1991 till 21.12.2001.
Likewise 2016 Rules provided the cutoff dates of 31.12.2001 and
12.09.2016 between which, if any candidate is continuously working,
then they would become eligible for regularization in 2001 Rules and
approximately ten years period has been considered to make a person
eligible for regularization. In 2016 Rules, approximately 15 years period
has been considered to make a person eligible for regularization.
14. In the considered opinion of this Court as per the directions of the
Apex Court in Putti Lal (supra), the grant of minimum pay scale is
subject to the eligibility of the candidate for regularization and
consequently the period more than ten years continuous service has been
considered appropriate to make a person eligible for grant of minimum

WRIA No. 9485 of 2023
8
pay scale and likewise in the office memo dated 29.04.2024 also, the
respondents has also taken into consideration the ten years continuous
service to make a person eligible for grant of minimum pay scale.
15. In view of the above, it is provided that each and every person, who
has completed 10 years continuous service as daily wager/Class-IV
employee as on 09.11.2023 as provided in office memo dated 24.09.2024
or would complete 10 years service subsequently, shall be entitled for
grant of minimum pay scale and while calculating the continuous service,
the respondent shall also ignore the artificial breaks, if any, not exceeding
one year at a time and the office memo dated 24.09.2024, is modified
accordingly.
16. In such view of the matter, the instant petition is disposed of with a
direction to the respondents to verify whether the petitioner has completed
10 years continuous service and if yes, the petitioner shall be granted
minimum pay scale, within a period of eight weeks from the date of
production of certified copy of this order.
17. Let this case be de-linked from the bunch matters and should not be
shown in the cause list.
(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)
May 25, 2026
Ashish Pd.
Digitally signed by :-
ASHISH PRASAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad