Chattisgarh High Court
Hem Lal Verma vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 June, 2021
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (S) No. 4228 of 2018
1. Hem Lal Verma S/o Late Shri Rambharosa Verma, Aged About 51
Years R/o Village And Post Dhara, P.S. And Tahsil Dongargarh, District
Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
5. Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Forest,
Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest, Head Quarter Jail Road Raipur
Chhattisgarh.
3. Chief Conservator Of Forest, Durg Circle Durg, District Durg
Chhattisgarh.
4. Divisional Forest Officer, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon
Chhattisgarh.
5. Sub Divisional Forest Officer, Sub Forest Division Khairagarh/
Chairman Scrutiny Committee Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Shri F.S. Khare, Advocate.
For State : Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order On Board
09.06.2021
1. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for an
appropriate direction to the respondents for considering his case for
regularization.
2. During the course of hearing, it has been revealed that the petitioner
had in-fact initially worked under the respondents between 1991 to
2004, thereafter his service was discontinued. The petitioner-worker
thereafter had raised an industrial dispute vide case No. 202/I.D.
Act/Ref./2008. The said reference was decided by the award dated
09.11.2011 pronounced on 05.01.2012. The Labour Court vide the said
award had granted the relief of reinstatement with 50 % back wages.
The further material available shows that the said order of
reinstatement with 50 % back-wages was challenged by the State
Government vide WP(L) No. 97/2012. The said writ petition of the State
Government has been decided only on 09.06.2021 i.e. today. This
Court has partly allowed the said writ petition affirming the order of
reinstatement, however the awarding of 50 % back-wages has been
set aside by this Court.
3. Given the said fact that the order of reinstatement of the worker was
under challenge before the High Court, the authorities could not have
expected to have considered regularizing the service of the petitioner in
between. However, now that the said writ petition i.e. WP(L) No
97/2012 stands decided affirming the order of reinstatement and also
taking note of the fact that the petitioner was reinstated after the award
of the Labour Court on 23.01.2012 and since then he has been
continuously working with the respondents till date i.e. for a further
period of 8 years by now. The claim for regularization of the petitioner
fructifies only from today after the disposal of the aforesaid writ petition.
4. Given the said facts, the petitioner herein is now directed to approach
the respondents by way of a detailed representation afresh supported
with all relevant documents and records that is in his possession
claiming for regularization in accordance with the circulars issued by
the State Government from time to time dealing with the regularization.
Subject to the petitioner making a representation in this regard, the
authorities concerned may take an appropriate decision in accordance
with the policy governing the field and also the various judgments laid
down by this Court from time to time at the earliest preferably within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
5. It is made clear that the claim for regularization of the petitioner has to
be decided a fresh without being influenced by the earlier decision
taken by the authority in rejecting his claim for regularization under the
then prevailing facts and circumstances.
6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.
Sd/-
1. P. Sam Koshy
Judge
Jyotijha
