Usha Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 472 Jhar

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                 W.P.(S) No. 3944 of 2017
                                            ----

              Usha Devi                                ...  Petitioner
                                         -versus-
              The State of Jharkhand & Others          ...  Respondents
                                            ----
                       CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
                                                ----
                        For the Petitioner :    Mr. Dilip Kumar Prasad, Advocate

For the Respondents : Mr. Suraj Prakash, AC to SC VII

----

14/ 27.01.2023 In support of claim of the petitioner, counsel for the petitioner relies on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited versus Bhurumal reported in (2014) 7 SCC 177, especially, paragraph 35 of the said judgment.

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was working as a Daily Wager on the post of Lady Warden from 08.01.2001 till May 2016, when she had to undergo a medical exigency for which she applied for leave. It is her case that thereafter she was retrenched. In terms of a policy, the respondents have regularized several wardens and the case of the petitioner was also considered, but the petitioner was not regularized as she was treated to be terminated. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there are several other Junior Daily Wagers who were retained and regularized, but the petitioner was given a different treatment.

Considering the submissions of the petitioner, I direct the respondents to file a supplementary counter affidavit, answering the following queries:-

(i) Whether the petitioner had sought leave prior to going on Medical Leave?

(ii) Whether the petitioner was a Daily Wager since 2001 till May 2016?

(iii) The date of initial engagement of the petitioner as Daily Wager?

(iv) Whether any Daily Wager as Lady Warden or other juniors to the petitioner have been regularized or not?

(v) Whether before disengaging the petitioner, any show cause notice was issued to the petitioner or not? List this case after three weeks under the heading "For Orders".

(Ananda Sen, J.) Kumar/S.K/Cp-02