M.P. Singh, J - (1.) THIS Court takes a serious view of the manner in which the State has conducted itself in court. After the learned counsel for the petitioners had argued the cases for some time on 17th August, 1993, Mr. M.C. Dwivedi, learned Standing Counsel made a request to the court for adjournment on the ground that steps were being taken for absorption of all the petitioners. The matter was accordingly adjourned. It was listed on 14th September, 1993, Mr. Dwivedi again made a prayer for one month's further time for taking steps for absorption. It was allowed. Nothing has been done. Today when the case was taken up Mr. Dwivedi made a statement that though he has written a letter on 20th August, 1993 to the Principal Secretary, Hill Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh with a copy to the Labour Secretary and Labour Commissioner but there was no response from them. The way in which the department has been acting was extremely unfair. Now, the case is being disposed of on merit.
(2.) THIS batch of writ petitions, involves identical questions of law. Facts are almost similar. So, it is being disposed of by a common order. Writ Petition No. 6963 of 1992, Shri. Chand and others vs. State of U.P. and others is being taken up as the leading case. Admittedly the Government of Uttar Pradesh framed a scheme in the year, 1976 known as "Bonded Labourer Rehabilitation Scheme."
(3.) THE scheme was primarily framed in order to rehabilitate the bonded labourers working in the Hill region of District Deharadun Dehradun , Uttar Kashi and Tehri Garhwal, Subsequently extended to other districts also i.e. Banda, Ghazipur etc.;