HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 10757 of 2025 Court No. - 8 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 07.03.2025 whereby petitioners' representation for regularization on the post of Drivers in Panchayati Raj Department has been rejected. 3. It has been submitted that the opposite parties while passing the impugned order have completely ignored judgment required by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ-A No. 632 of 2020, Gyan Das and others versus State of U.P. and others, decided vide judgment and order dated 31.07.2023. It is submitted that the said judgment was thereafter upheld in Special Appeal No. 280 of 2024 vide judgment and order dated 01.04.2024. The Division Bench judgment was also thereafter affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Appeal (Civil) Diary No.34875 of 2024. 4. Learned counsel for petitioners also submits that in terms of judgment rendered in the case of Gyan Das (supra), petitioners therein have already been regularized on 13.11.2024 while ignoring the case of similarly situated petitioners. 5. Learned State Counsel has not been provided any instructions but was unable to draw any distinction in the case of Gyan Das (supra) with that of petitioners. 6. It is, thus, evident that in the case of Gyan Das (supra) petitioners were Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pt. S. Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Govind Prasad Gaud And 4 Others .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Panchayat Raj Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) working as drivers in the office District Panchayat Raj Officer as the petitioners and were seeking regularization in terms of the U.P. Regularization of Daily Wages Appointments on Group-D Posts Rules, 2001 primarily on the ground that they were working prior to cut-off date of 29.06.1991. As indicated hereinabove, the aforesaid petition was allowed and with judgment being upheld uptill the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. However, upon a perusal of the impugned order, it appears that petitioners' case has been rejected without considering the aforesaid judgment. 8. In view thereof, the impugned order dated 07.03.2025 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari granting liberty to opposite party no.1 i.e. Principal Secretary of Panchayat Raj, Government of U.P., Civil Secretariat, U.P. Lucknow to re-consider petitioners' case for regularization in terms of judgment rendered in the case of Gyan Das (supra). 9. Such a decision shall be taken by the concerned authority within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the concerned authority. 10. In terms of aforesaid, petition succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own cost. September 17, 2025 Satish WRIA No. 10757 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench