Chattisgarh High Court
Komal Prasad Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 29 April, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:19347
Digitally
signed by
SHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
2025.04.30
16:18:48
+0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 2588 of 2025
1 - Komal Prasad Sahu S/o Shri Birbal Prasad Sahu Aged About 45
Years Working As Driver R/o Vidhansabha, Raipur District - Raipur
(C.G.)
--- Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Public
Works Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh
2 - Engineer In Chief Department Of Public Works, Sirpur Bhawan Raipur
District - Raipur Chhattisgarh
3 - Chief Engineer Department Of Public Works Raipur District - Raipur
Chhattisgarh
4 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Public Works Raipur District
- Raipur Chhattisgarh
2
5 - Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works Division
Vidhansabha Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh
6 - Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department Sub Divisional Raipur
District - Raipur Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent(s)
1 - Mukesh Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Prithvinath Gupta Aged About 38
Years Working As Skilled Labor Spot Assistant, R/o Vimesh Singh Gali,
Pichhe Para Ward No. 1, Balrampur, Dist - Balrampur-Ramanuganj
Chhattisgarh
---Petitioner(s)
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public
Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2 - Engineer-In-Chief Department Of Public Works, Sirpur Bhawan,
Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3 - Chief Engineer Department Of Public Works, Ramanujganj, Distt.
Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
4 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Public Works, Ramanujganj,
Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
5 - Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works (B And R), Division
Ramanujganj, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
6 - Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department (B And R), Sub
Division Ramanujganj, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent(s)
1 - Rita Devi W/o Shri Yogendra Ram Aged About 32 Years Working As
Part Time Sweeper, R/o House No. 36 B, Ward No. 2, High School Para,
Post- Sanawal, Sanawal, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj,
Chhattisgarh.
---Petitioner(s)
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public
Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Engineer-In-Chief Department Of Public Works, Sirpur Bhawan,
Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Chief Engineer Department Of Public Works, Ramanujganj, District
Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
4 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Public Works, Ramanujganj,
District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
5 - Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works (B And R), Division
Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
6 - Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department(B And R), Sub
Division Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent(s)
1 - Dayashankar Manikpuri S/o Shri Lalji Manikpuri Aged About 54 Years
Working As Unskilled Labour, R/o Post- Sanawal, Vill.- Sanawal,
Balrampur, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)
---Petitioner(s)
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public
Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2 - Engineer-In-Chief Department Of Public Works, Sirpur Bhawan,
Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3 - Chief Engineer Department Of Public Works, Ramanujganj, Distt.
Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh
4 - Superintendent Engineer Department Of Public Works, Ramanujganj,
Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh
5 - Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works (B And R), Division
Ramanujganj, Distt. Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh
6 - Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department (B And R), Sub
Division Ramanujganj, Distt. Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Petitioner(s) : Shri Syed Ishhadil Ali, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Shri Vinay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General, Ms.
Poorva Tiwari, and Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Saini
Panel Lawyers
Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Order on Board
29.04.2025
1. Since the identical issues involved in the above mentioned writ
petitions, they are being heard and decided by this common order.
2. By the present petitions, the petitioners are seeking a direction
towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the
petitioners on their respective post on which they are rendering
their services on daily wages since a long period pursuant to the
circular dated 05.03.2008 from the date when the similarly situated
persons have been regularized.
3. Case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioners are presently
working on the post of Driver, Skilled Labour Spot Assistant, Part
time Sweeper and unskilled labour in department of respondent
as daily wager/contract basis and has completed about the period
of more than one decade. The petitioners are having all the
requisite qualifications for holding the said post. The petitioners had
submitted their detailed representations to the respondent
authorities for considering his case for regular appointment as they
had already completed about the period of more than one decade.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the action on the
part of the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory
in nature and also violative of the principles of natural justice and
Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a
daily wager since long. He would further submit that the State
government has regularized the services of similarly situated daily
wage employees on the basis of circular dated 05/03/2008,
therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for regularization of his
services on the post of Computer Operator. In support of his
contention, learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed by
this Court in the matter of Manoj Kumar Nirmalkar v. State of
Chhattisgarh1
5. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State would
oppose the contention of the counsel for the petitioner.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari
and Others v. The State of Jharkhand and Others 2 held in para
11 as under:
"11. Under the circumstances, we are of the view that the
Regularization Rules must be given a pragmatic interpretation
and the appellants, if they have completed 10 years of service
on the date of promulgation of the Regularization Rules, ought
to be given the benefit of the service rendered by them. If they
have completed 10 years of service they should be
regularized unless there is some valid objection to their
regularization like misconduct etc."
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the
principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the
petitions are allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to
inspect the records of others similarly situated employees when
their services were regularized. If the case of the petitioners are
also found to be similar to those daily wagers/contract basis whose
services were regularized, their services be also regularized from
the same date. It is also directed that all this exercise be completed
within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this
order.
Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru)
Judge
Shoaib
2 Civil Appeal Nos. 7423-7429 of 2018 (decided on 01/08/2018)
