TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 429, 430 and 431 of the Financial Hand Book Volume-VI read with paragraph 476 of the Part-I of the Public Works Department of Manual of orders in local arrangements. A writ petition was filed by the respondent herein, inter alia, praying for his regularization. A learned Single Judge of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on the day of preliminary hearing while issuing rule passed the following order: In the meantime, the opposite parties no.3 to 5 shall examine the petitioner's claim for regularization under the Regularization Rules 2001 and pass appropriate orders. However, his claim shall not be rejected on the gro,und of the post being not available. Supernumerary posts have to be created to comply wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of the recent Constitution Bench decision of this Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka Ors. vs. Umadevi Ors. [(2006) 4 SCC 1)], it is now well-settled that the appointments, if made in violation of the constitutional scheme of equality as enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, would be rendered illegal and, thus void ab initio. No regularization rules, therefore, could have been made by the State of Uttar Pradesh in derogation to the statutory or constitutional scheme. Furthermore, the State of Uttar Pradesh must have made rules in terms of the proviso appended to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, providing for the mode and manner in which recruitments are to be made. Such rules have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be reopened based on this judgment. but there should be no further byepassing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme. The observations made in the said paragraph must be read in the light of the observations made in paragraphs 15 and 16 of the judgment. The Constitution Bench referred to the decisions of this Court in State of Mysore vs. S.V. Narayanappa 1967 (1) SCR 128, R.N. Nanjundappa vs. T. Thimmiah, 1972 (1) SCC 409 and B.N. Nagarajan vs. State of Karnataka 1979 (4) SCC 507, B.N. Nagarajan is a decision rendered by a three judge bench of this Court in which it has clearly been held that the regularisation does not mean permanence. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gular' or 'regularization' do not connote permanence and cannot be construed so as to convey an idea of the nature of tenure of appointments. They are terms calculated to condone any procedural irregularities and are meant to cure only such defects as are attributable to methodology followed in making the appointments. Judged by standards laid down by this Court in the aforementioned decisions, the appointments of the respondents are illegal. They do not thus, have any legal right to continue in service. {See also State of Madhya Pradesh Ors. vs. Yogesh Chandra Dubey Ors. [ (2006) 8 SCC 67)] It is not the case of the respondents that they were recruited in terms of the provisions of the recruitment rules ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
