- (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the State -respondents.
(2.) THIS special appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, refusing to grant relief prayed for by the appellant for his regularization as Collection Amin under the U.P. Collection Amins Service Rules 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1974 Rules'). Mr. Radha Kant Ojha, learned Counsel for the appellant contends that as a matter of fact, the appellant has made recovery, which according to his calculation, is sufficient to satisfy the explanation appended to Rule 5 of the 1974 Rules and, therefore, having acquired the minimum eligibility, the respondents had committed an error by not allowing/granting relief of regularisation to the appellant.
(3.) THE appellant had earlier come to this Court praying for the same, but no such relief had been granted. However, this Court, vide judgment dated 23.7.2008, observed that if vacancies within 35% quota are available for regular appointment, the claim of the petitioner along with other such eligible Seasonal Collection Amins shall be considered irrespective of any of the observations made in the order.;