- (1.)Petitioners, in all the aforementioned writ petitions, claim that they have been performing and discharging duties as Seasonal Collection Peons for different periods. Their further contention is that various other incumbents, who had been engaged subsequent to petitioners, they have been extended the benefit of confirmation, but as far as petitioners are concerned, they have been denuded from the aforesaid benefit. This fact has not been disputed that in the list of Seasonal Collection Peons, whose claim is entitled to be considered for confirmation/regularization, petitioners' names find place. This fact has also not been disputed that petitioners fall within the category of Seasonal Collection Peons, entitled to be offered job as per exigency of work. Grievance, which has been sought to be raised, is that earlier, claiming that there were various vacancies of regular Collection Peons, petitioners had approached this Court seeking a direction for their regularization. This Court had directed the District Magistrate to consider the claim of petitioners by means of different orders. Thereafter, District Magistrate has proceeded to pass order, mentioning therein that as there was ban imposed by State Government, as such claim of petitioners at that point of time was not considered, and further there were various other senior incumbents, as such said exercise in respect of petitioners could not be undertaken. At this juncture, present writ petition has been filed.
(2.)It has been sought to be contended that there are various vacancies of Collection Peons in existence and qua the said vacancies no exercise is being undertaken for filling up of the posts, as per provisions as contained under U.P. Collection Peon Service Rules, 2004, wherein Rule 5 clearly provides that 50% of the posts of Collection Peons have to be filled up from amongst Seasonal Collection Peons, who have performed satisfactory service for four faslis and have not crossed the age of 45 years. In this regard copy of letter dated 08.11.2006 written by Secretary to the State Government to the Commissioner and Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow has been produced. Tenor of the letter clearly indicates that as far as consideration of claims of Seasonal Collection Peons are concerned, same has to be done, and therein a particular mode has also been prescribed as per which said exercise has to be undertaken. Said letter is clearly indicative of the fact that at the relevant point of time, there was no ban, which was operating, in respect of Seasonal Collection Peons, whose regularization had to take place. Apart from this, letter dated 12.12.2006 written by Secretary to the State Government to the Commissioner and Secretary, Board of Revenue, U.P. at Lucknow, has also been produced, and therein 7 exceptions have been carved out wherein exercise can be undertaken for filling up the posts. The exceptions, which have been carved out, therein it has been provided that promotional exercise can be undertaken; further exercise can be undertaken in respect of regularization of ad hoc employees. From said observations, in respect of regularization of Seasonal Collection Pens, it cannot be said that there was any ban imposed by State Government, as such claim of petitioners could have been considered in consonance with the provisions as contained under U.P. Collection Peon Service Rules, 2004.
(3.)In these circumstances and in this background, all the four writ petitions are disposed of with direction to the District Magistrate, Mirzapur to see that exercise is undertaken strictly in consonance with the provisions as contained under U.P. Collection Peon Service Rules, 2004, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, ignoring that there is any ban operating against regularization of Seasonal Collection Peon.