Sabhajeet Yadav, J. - (1.) Feeling aggrieved against the orders dated 1.7.1987 and 25.9.1989, contained in Annexures-1 and 2 of the writ petition respectively, the petitioners have filed above noted writ petition seeking writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the same. The order dated 1.7.1987 was in the shape of circular issued by Secretary, U.P. Board of Revenue, Anubhag-2 Lucknow, wherein it has been stated that the persons who had been appointed after 1.5.1983 on adhoc basis their services cannot be regularised under the provisions of U.P. Regularisation of Services (on the Post beyond the purview of U.P. Public Service Commission Regularisation) Rules, 1979 as amended in the year 1984, therefore, their services were directed to be terminated in view of Rule 8 of the aforesaid regularisation Rules. It was also mentioned in the order that 12 Collection Amins who have been appointed after 1.5.1983 on adhoc basis in the concerned district, they cannot be given benefit of aforesaid regularisation Rules. Accordingly a impugned order dated 25.9.1989 has been passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Deoria contained in Annexure-2 of the writ petition after affording opportunity of hearing to the individual persons. The petitioners of the instant writ petition have challenged both the orders referred herein above.
(2.) The challenge of petitioners against the aforesaid order rests on the fact that petitioners No. 1 to 3 were initially appointed as Seasonal Collection Amins with effect from 7.1.1976, 19.1.1976 and 17.1.1976 respectively by the respondents According to them their work and conduct were excellent as they were appointed again and again for both the seasons of Rabi and Kharif and they continued to work for more than 4 Fasli. Similarly the petitioners No. 4, 5 and 6 who are members of Scheduled Caste were appointed respectively in the year 1977, 1983 and 1976 as Seasonal Collection Amins by the orders of Sub-Divisional Officer, Deoria. They have also served more than 4 Fasli. It is also alleged that the petitioners were senior-most Collection Amins as shown in the gradation list of Collection Amins Accordingly a proposal was made to appoint the petitioners No. 4, 5 and 6 against substantive vacancies as Collection Amins on adhoc basis by Tehsildar, Deoria on 23.4.1989 which was approved by Sub-Divisional Officer, Deoria on 27.4.1989, Thereafter they were appointed as such. The proposal is on record as Annexure-4 of the writ petition, It is also alleged that the appointment of petitioner No. 1 was made in place of Sri Jeetu Prasad who retired as Regular Collection Amin. The petitioner No. 2 was appointed in place of Sri Gauri Shanker Pandey who retired as regular Collection Amin and petitioner No. 3 took place of Sri Brij Kishore Pandey who was promoted and posted as Naib Tehsildar, Similarly the appointment of petitioner No. 4 was made in place of Sri Hari Nandan Pandey who retired as permanent Amin, petitioner No. 5 was appointed in place of Sri Mathura Prasad who was promoted on the post of Naib Tehsildar and the appointment of petitioner No. 6 was made in place of Sri Sukhdeo Prasad who retired as permanent Collection Amin. The appointment, of petitioners No. 1 to 6 were made on 27.4.1989 against substantive vacancies on temporary and officiating basis by the competent authority in accordance with the Clause-3 of 1 Rule-20 of U.P. Collection Amin's Services (IVth Amendment) Rules, 1984 which confers power upon competent authority to make such adhoc/officiating appointments and such appointments can continue for a period of one year or till the next selection held which ever is earlier. It is further stated that in pursuance of their appointment made on 27,4.1989, the petitioners joined their duties in the area assigned to them on 27.4.1989 and since then they are working as on adhoc or officiating basis against substantive vacancies of Collection Amins. The work and performance of petitioners have been found most satisfactory and no complaint was made against their work and conduct during the course of the employment as Collection Amins. It is further sated that neither any regular selection was made on the post held by the petitioners nor the period for which the petitioners were appointed have expired. Before expiry of aforesaid period-the appointments of the petitioners were cancelled by Addl. Collector, Deoria vide his order dated 21M June 1989 merely on the ground that in view of order circular dated 1.7.1987 petitioners adhoc/officiating appointment against the substantive vacancy are illegal and petitioners cannot be allowed to continue as Collection Amins against substantive vacancies. No opportunity of hearing whatsoever was however afforded to the petitioners before passing such order The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid order dated 21.6.1989 passed by respondent No. 3 as well as consequal order dated 29.6.1989 passed by respondent No. 4 by means of writ petition of 1989 Indra Deo Singh v. Additional District Magistrate, Deoria, which was admitted by the Division Bench of this Court on 20.7.1989 and the Operation of order dated 21.6.1989 and 29.6.1989 was stayed. It was however left open to the respondents to pass fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Certified copy of interim order dated 20.7.1989 alongwith the application dated 26.7.1989 was sent by the petitioners through registered post to the respondent No. 4 requesting him for compliance of the interim order of this Court dated 20th July, 1989 and to pass a fresh order after affording the opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Thereafter respondent No. 4 has passed the impugned order on 25.9.1989, contained in Annexure-2 of the writ petition, whereby the petitioners' services were terminated in compliance of Board order dated 1.7.1987 merely on the ground that petitioners were appointed after 1.5.1983. According to the petitioners the impugned order dated 25.9.1989 has been passed by the respondents without affording any opportunity of hearing to them.
(3.) It is further stated that U.P. Regularisation of Adhoc Appointment (on Posts outside the Purview of the Public Service Commission) (Amendment) Rules 1989 has come into force providing benefit of regularisation to the adhoc employees appointed upto 1st October 1986 but has excluded the regularisation of Seasonal Collection Amins in wholly arbitrary manner. Thus besides seeking relief of quashing of the impugned orders the petitioners have also sought relief of re-instatement and regularisation of service ignoring the cut off dates mentioned in the aforesaid regularisation Rules.;