- (1.) Heard Shri Ashok Khare, Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the respondents. By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 18.04.2013 passed by the Dy. District Magistrate, Gola, District Gorakhpur and further prayed for direction to the respondents not to interfere in the working of the petitioners as collection peon and to pay the petitioners their regular monthly salary on their respective post.
(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioners were appointed as Seasonal Collection Peon in Revenue Department of the State in District Gorakhpur between 1976 to 1982. Each of the petitioners was granted as seasonal engagement till the year 1991. In the year 1991 the services of the petitioners were discontinued despite continued existence of vacancies. Aggrieved with the same the petitioners as well as other similarly situated persons had filed Writ Petition No.5699 of 1991 (Sitaram & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors.) before this Court raising a grievance against the discontinuance of their services despite vacancies being available. They also agitated a grievance with regard to their non-regularization. In the said writ petition an interim order was granted by this Court on 10.09.1991 in favour of the petitioners. Inspite of the interim order and the existence of the vacancy on the post of seasonal collection peon, no work was taken from the petitioners subsequent to 6.9.1991. During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, four out of 19 petitioners in the said writ petition were given regular appointment in the year 1995. The said regular appointment was given to the four petitioners on the basis of their length of service as Seasonal Collection Peon and without subjecting them to any other selection proceedings. However, no similar orders had been passed in favour of present petitioners. The said writ petition was finally disposed of by learned Single Judge on 11.1.2005 observing that as the four out of 19 petitioners have been regularised, the opposite parties will also consider the case of the remaining petitioners for regularisation of their service in accordance with the provisions of the Regularisation Rules.
(3.) In compliance of the aforesaid order, the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur had considered the claim of the petitioners and rejected the same vide order dated 29.04.2008 on the ground that they have not been granted seasonal appointment subsequent to 1398 Fasalai and had also crossed 45 years of age. It was further recorded that their collection was also less than 70%. Aggrieved with the same, the petitioners had filed Writ Petition No.13225 of 2009 (Sitaram & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors., which was allowed on 22.4.2011 quashing the order dated 29.04.2008 and remitting the matter for fresh consideration. In compliance of the order/ judgment dated 22.4.2011 the District Magistrate by communication dated 27.7.2011 made a reference to the State Government for grant of relaxation in upper age limit to the petitioners as they had crossed the age of 45 years. Acting on this the State Government by order dated 15.9.2011 granted relaxation to the petitioners. Upon receipt of the aforesaid order the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur by order dated 16.11.2011 sanctioned grant of regular appointment to all the petitioners. In pursuance thereof the Addl. District Magistrate (Finance / Revenue), Gorakhpur passed formal order dated 26.11.2011. In pursuance of the order dated 26.11.2011 all the petitioners have joined Meanwhile it appears that one Shri Ramanand Gupta had also claimed for grant of regular appointment. His claim was rejected by the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur by order dated 20.6.2009 on the ground that he had already crossed 45 years of age. The said order was assailed by means of Writ Petition No.65262 of 2009 (Ramanand Gupta v. State of U.P. & Ors.), which was allowed on 10.10.2011. Despite the aforesaid judgment no steps were taken by the district authorities for according consideration to the claim of Ramanand Gupta. As such Shri Ramanand Gupta filed Contempt Petition No.2571 of 2012 in which notices were issued to the District Magistrate. On 20.7.2012 the District Magistrate, Gorakhpur passed an order rejecting the claim of Shri Ramanand Gupta. The said order was filed in the aforesaid contempt petition along with affidavit of compliance. Shri Ramanand Gupta filed his objection against the said affidavit of compliance. In such objection it was further claimed that on 26.11.2011 the District Magistrate had granted regular appointment to four persons. Based upon the said recital the contempt court passed an order on 7.3.2013 summoning the District Magistrate to appear before the Court. Upon passing of the said order the District Magistrate proceeded to get a seniority list prepared on 13.3.2013. He further proceeded to pass an order dated 13.3.2013 granting regular appointment to two persons namely Harakh Chand and Avinash Kumar. Further some orders were passed in the contempt proceedings. Admittedly, in the said proceedings the petitioners herein were not the party.;