Court rules regularization is implicit in confirmation, mandates promotion from when juniors were elevated.
In a landmark judgment dated May 11, 2026, the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has ordered the State of Uttar Pradesh to consider the promotion of Deva Nand Srivastava to the post of Assistant Consolidation Officer (ACO) with effect from the date his juniors were promoted. The court found that the administrative failure to issue formal regularization orders should not impede an employee's right to promotion if their services have been confirmed.
The case, presided over by Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar, highlighted significant administrative oversights concerning Srivastava, who was initially appointed as a Consolidation Lekhpal in 1986 on an officiating basis. Despite being confirmed in his role in 1991 and later promoted to Consolidator in 2008, Srivastava's further promotion was denied based on alleged non-regularization of his services.
The judgment emphasized that regularization is implicit in confirmation, and administrative lapses should not disadvantage an employee, especially after decades of continuous service. The court observed that several juniors to Srivastava were promoted despite similar circumstances, pointing to discriminatory practices violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
The court also referred to previous Supreme Court and High Court rulings, asserting that procedural technicalities should not obstruct substantive rights accrued through long-term service. It directed the state to rectify this oversight and ensure Srivastava receives all consequential benefits, including seniority, within three months.
The decision underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding employees' rights against bureaucratic inefficiencies and sets a precedent for similar cases of administrative oversight.
Bottom line:-
Service law - Promotion cannot be denied on the ground of lack of formal regularization if an employee's services were confirmed and he served continuously for decades. Administrative lapses cannot prejudice an employee's rights.
Statutory provision(s): Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, U.P. Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments (On Posts within the Purview of the Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979, Uttar Pradesh Consolidators Service Rules, 1978, Uttar Pradesh Revenue Consolidation Service Rules, 1992, Uttar Pradesh Government Servants' Seniority Rules, 1991.
Deva Nand Srivastava v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc id # 2907195
