Rajendra Sharma vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2865 Chatt

                                              1




                                                                                  NAFR

                    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                  WPS No. 5805 of 2021
     Rajendra Sharma S/o Bachchan Sharma, Aged About 58 Years R/o Village
     And Post Banbaghera, Police Station Somni, District Rajnandgaon
     Chhattisgarh
                                                                       ---- Petitioner
                                           Versus
     1.      State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Forest Department,
             Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur
             Chhattisgarh.
     2.      Additional Principal Chief, Conservator Of Forest (Administ./Non
             Gazetted), Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh
     3.      Chief Forest Conservator (Regional) Durg Region, District Durg
             Chhattisgarh
     4.      Forest Divisional Officer, Forest Division Rajnandgaon, District
             Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
                                                                    ----Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate For State : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Deputy A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 25/10/2021

1. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for an

appropriate direction to the respondents to consider the claim for grant

of regularization.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner was engaged by the

respondents as a daily wage employee in October, 1984 and the

petitioner was discharging the duties of a Security Guard. He continued

to work on the said post till February, 2002, when on account of his

getting convicted in a criminal case, his services stood discontinued. The

judgment of conviction was subsequently set-aside by the judgment of

this High Court dated 30.06.2010 in Criminal Appeal No. 826/2003 and

the petitioner stood acquitted from the charges leveled against him.

3. The petitioner subsequent to the acquittal was taken back in service

somewhere in the year 2011 as stated by the petitioner and since then

the petitioner is still working continuously and uninterruptedly. Thus,

according to the petitioner he has put in around three decades of service

with the respondents. Therefore in terms of the circular dated

05.03.2008 dealing with regularization the claim of the petitioner should

also be decided.

4. The State counsel submits that the matter can be disposed of subject to

verification of the entitlement and also verification of the aspect as to

whether the petitioner was employed elsewhere during the period of his

absence from duty between 2002 to 2010 and also subject to verification

as to whether the petitioner would fall within the category of employees,

who would be entitled for regularization in terms of the circular dated

05.03.2008.

5. In terms of the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the writ

petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents to

scrutinize the claim of the petitioner in terms of the circular dated

05.03.2008 dealing with regularization and an appropriate decision be

taken at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from the date

of receipt of the copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands

disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved