- (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, inter -alia, praying for following beliefs: "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing orders dated 26 -4 -2001 passed by Inspector General of Registration U.P. Allahabad, Respondent No.2 contained in Annexure Nos. 12, 13, 14 and 15 15 -A to the Writ Petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus Commanding Respondent, Inspector General of Registration, U.P. Allahabad, Respondent No.2 to regularise the Petitioners to the post of Registration Clerk w.e.f. from respective dates of engagement as per direction give by the Supreme Court in the case of Khagesh Kumar and others Vs. Inspector General of Registration and others, 1996 UPLBEC 23 and Inspector General of Registration U.P. and another Vs. Avdesh Kumar and others, 1996 3 UPLBEC 1744 contained in Annexure Nos. 2 and 3 to the writ petition and to pay them their salary for engagement under Rule 101 of the Manual or any arrears outstanding against them. (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding Respondents Inspector General of Registration, U.P. Allahabad, Respondent No.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner for regularization keeping in mind the directions issued by Supreme Court in the case of Khagesh Kumar and Avdesh Kumar read with direction issued by Hon'ble High Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5614 of 1997, Jai Gopal Sharma and others vs. Inspector General of Registration U.P. Allahabad and others by order dated 2.1.2001 contained in Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition. (iv) pass such other and further orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) award costs."
(2.) THE brief facts which give rise to this writ petition are that:
(3.) EARLIER all the petitioners filed writ petition no. 5614 of 1997 on the allegation that all the petitioners were appointed as Registration Clerk on daily basis in the District -Agra. They have worked from different dates and continuous upto certain dates. Counter affidavit was filed in that writ petition and the matter was heard by Hon'ble A.K. Yog, J., who disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 2.1.2001, which is quoted below: "In all the above petitions, common question i.e. (regularization of the petitioner who claim to be appointed on daily wages by way of gap arrangement) has been raised. The above petition can be placed in two groups. First group of petition was filed prior to the judgment and order dated 27th Sept.1995 of the Supreme Court, dealing with this subject in the case of Khagesh Kumar and others Versus Inspector General of Registration and others, 1996 UPLBEC 23 and second group of the petitions is one filed after the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court. This Court granted interim orders in some of the writ petitions though in different terms. In the rest of the petition, no interim orders were passed. These petitions have been pending for three to nine years approximately. It is to be noted that by and large, reliefs claimed in these petitions cannot be granted since the order of regularization has to be passed by the competent authorities in accordance with law and in terms of the judgment and order dated 27th September, 1995 in the case of Khagesh Kumar passed by the Apex Court read with subsequent order dated April 1996 passed by the Apex Court in the matter of Inspector General of Registration State of U.P. Versus Awadesh in Civil Appeal No. 79500 of 1996 (arising out of Special Leave Petition No.C173 of 1993 decided along with several other Civil Appeals (copy annexed as Annexure -5 to the Writ Petition No.2317 of 1997 Satish Kumar Pathak Versus State of U.P. And others). The controversy raised in these petitions, as admitted at the Bar, is covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Khagesh Kumar . Accordingly, I allow the present petition by moulding the relief and in terms and conditions contained in the Judgment in the case of Khagesh Kumar read with order of the Supreme Court in the case of Awadhesh Kumar . The petitioners are directed to file a representation before the competent authority for redressal of their grievances (viz regularization and payment of regular salary etc.) along with certified copy of this judgement within six weeks from today and if such a representation is being filed within the above stipulated time, if not already considered for regularization, the competent concerned authority within four months of receipt of the said representation decide the same in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Khagesh Kumar and / or Awadesh Kumar , as well as scheme/relevant rules, if any, framed. In case, any petitioner has already been considered for regularization this order shall be ignored. The writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.";