- (1.) Heard Sri Ramendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) Three counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 4, 7 and 8. No one has appeared on their behalf. The matter has been taken up in the revised call.
(3.) This writ petition questions the correctness of the judgment and order of the State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow, whereby the Tribunal has rejected the petition filed by the petitioner-Authority and has arrived at the conclusion that the contesting respondents had been engaged as daily wage employees and having worked with the petitioner for more than 240 days, they were entitled to be considered for regularization, in view of the law laid down in the case of State of Haryana and others v. Piara Singh 1922 (4) SLR 770. The claim petition was disposed of with a direction that since regularization can be considered if there are vacancies and since there was no indication of any vacancy, therefore, the regularization claim of the petitioner cannot be accepted, but at the same time the authority was directed to pay the same pay scale as was being given to the regular employees.;