Vijay Prakash Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 1188 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Vijay Prakash Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 April, 2026

                                                    1/6




                                                                       2026:CGHC:14871
                                                                                         NAFR

                          HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                           WPS No. 2431 of 2026

            Vijay Prakash Gupta S/o Kali Ram Gupta Aged About 41 Years R/o Dipa Para
ALFIZA      Main Road Midmida Po- Jhalmala, District- Raigarh (C.G.)
BAIG
Digitally
                                                                                 ... Petitioner
signed by
ALFIZA
BAIG


                                                  versus


            1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Technical
            Education, Manpower, Science And Technology, Mantralaya, Mahanadi
            Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh


            2 - Director Directorate Of Technical Education, Manpower, Science And
            Technology, Chhattisgarh, Raipur Chhattisgarh


            3 - Principal Government Polytechnic, Mahasamund Chhattisgarh
                                                                             ... Respondents

            For Petitioner             :    Ms. Apoorva Pandey, Advocate
            For State                  :    Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel lawyer


                             S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
                                             Order on Board
            01.042026

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking following reliefs:-

"10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the

respondent authorities to consider the candidature of petitioner

for regularization on the post of Lecturer from the year 2018

when all the other similar situated persons were regularized, in

the light of judgment passed in Gopi Sao and ors. V/s State of

Chhattisgarh & Ors. Along with all consequential benefits.

10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any

other writ/writs, order/orders, relief/reliefs in favour of the

petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts

and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs

to the petitioner."

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is employee of

respondents and was initially appointed as Lecturer (Electrical

Engineering) on contractual basis under the Chhattisgarh Civil

Services (Contractual Appointment) Rules, 2004 and 2012 by order

dated 21.11.2010 and was posted at Govt. Polytechnic, Mahasamund ,

since then he is continuously performing his duty on the said post.

Petitioner is in service since 2010 however, he has not been

regularized. Petitioner submitted representation before respondent no.

2 vide Annexure P-4 requesting for regularization of his service, which

till date is pending consideration. Therefore, direction be issued to

respondent no. 2 to consider and take decision on the claim of

petitioner for regularization of her service within specified time frame.

She places reliance upon the judgment passed by Division Bench of

this Court in case of Gopi Sao and Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh &

Ors in a writ appeal bearing WA No. 14 of 2017 dated 07.012.2018.

3. Learned counsel for State submits that as petitioner is not pressing this

writ petition on merits and is only seeking direction to consider and

take decision on pending representation, he is having no objection.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

documents available on record.

5. Claim as raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is that he is

continuously working as daily wage employee since 2010, however, till

date he has not been regularized.

6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Others

Versus State of Jharkhand & Others reported in SCC (L&S) 2018 (2)

472 considered the issue of claim of regularization of temporary/daily

wages employees, who had completed 10 years of service. Further,

Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Jaggo Versus Union of India

reported in (2024) SCC Online SC 3826 has further observed that the

government departments to lead by example in providing fair and

stable employment. Engaging workers on a temporary basis for

extended periods, especially when their roles are integral to the

organization's functioning, not only contravenes international labour

standards but also exposes the organization to legal challenges and

undermines employee morale.

7. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bhola Nath Vs. The State of

Jharkhand & Ors. [SLP (Civil) No.30762 of 2024] and connected

Special Leave Petitions (Civil) vide its order dated 30th January 2026

has observed that respondent -State was not justified in continuing the

appellant's services on sanctioned posts for over a decade under

nomenclature of contractual engagement and thereafter denying them

consideration for regularization and have further directed for

regularizing the appellants therein, in service.

8. Recently, Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dharam Singh & Ors. Vs.

State of UP & Anr. (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1735) has strongly

deprecated the culture of "ad-hocism" adopted by States in their

capacity as employers. Hon'ble Supreme Court also criticized the

practice of outsourcing or informalizing recruitment as a means to

evade regular employment obligations, observing that such measures

perpetuate precarious working conditions while circumventing fair and

lawful engagement practices and observed thus:

"17. Before concluding, we think it necessary to recall that the State (here referring to both the Union and the State governments) is not a mere market participant but a constitutional employer. It cannot balance budgets on the backs of those who perform the most basic and recurring public functions. Where work recurs day after day and year after year, the establishment must reflect that reality in its sanctioned strength and engagement practices. The long- term extraction of regular labour under temporary labels corrodes confidence in public administration and offends the promise of equal protection. Financial stringency certainly has a place in public policy, but it is not a talisman that overrides fairness, reason and the duty to organise work on lawful lines.

18. Moreover, it must necessarily be noted that "ad-hocism"

thrives where administration is opaque. The State Departments must keep and produce accurate establishment registers, muster rolls and outsourcing arrangements, and they must explain, with evidence, why they prefer precarious

engagement over sanctioned posts where the work is perennial. If "constraint" is invoked, the record should show what alternatives were considered, why similarly placed workers were treated differently, and how the chosen course aligns with Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Sensitivity to the human consequences of prolonged insecurity is not sentimentality. It is a constitutional discipline that should inform every decision affecting those who keep public offices running.

x x x

20. We have framed these directions comprehensively because, case after case, orders of this Court in such matters have been met with fresh technicalities, rolling "reconsiderations," and administrative drift which further prolongs the insecurity for those who have already laboured for years on daily wages. Therefore, we have learned that Justice in such cases cannot rest on simpliciter directions, but it demands imposition of clear duties, fixed timelines, and verifiable compliance. As a constitutional employer, the State is held to a higher standard and therefore it must organise its perennial workers on a sanctioned footing, create a budget for lawful engagement, and implement judicial directions in letter and spirit. Delay to follow these obligations is not mere negligence but rather it is a conscious method of denial that erodes livelihoods and dignity for these workers. The operative scheme we have set here comprising of creation of supernumerary posts, full regularization, subsequent financial benefits, and a sworn affidavit of compliance, is therefore a pathway designed to convert rights into outcomes and to reaffirm that fairness in engagement and transparency in administration are not matters of grace, but obligations under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India."

9. Taking into consideration that the petitioner is engaged on contractual

basis since 2010, the circular issued by the State Government dated

05.03.2008 for regularization of daily wage/temporary employee who

are working prior to 1997 and the relief as claimed by petitioner for

regularization of his service as also considering the decision of Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the above mentioned cases, this writ petition at this

stage is disposed permitting the petitioner to submit fresh

comprehensive representation before the respondent No. 2 and if,

such a representation is submitted, the concerned authority shall

consider and take decision on the representation keeping in mind the

period of service which the petitioner has completed as also the

decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court on the issue of regularization of

daily wage/temporary employee, expeditiously, in accordance with law

expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 04 months from the

date of receipt of representation.

10. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and

direction.

               Certified copy as per rules.                            sd/-

                                                             (Parth Prateem Sahu)
                                                                    Judge
Alfiza