Jharkhand High Court
Naresh Kumar Sinha vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 January, 2024
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No.7216 of 2023
-----
Naresh Kumar Sinha .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department,
Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
3. The Commissioner, Mahatma Gandhi Rural Employment
Guarantee Adhiniyam (MNGREGA), Dhurwa, Ranchi.
4. The Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara.
5. The Block Development Officer, Jamtara.
.......... Respondents.
-----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Arpit Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Khushboo Kumari, A.C. to G.P.IV
-----
Order No.02 Date: 03.01.2024
1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of
direction upon the respondents to regularize/absorb the
services of the petitioner on the post of Gram Rojgar Sewak,
as he has been working on the said post for the last 15 years.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an
advertisement was published in the local newspaper for
appointment on the post of Gram Rojgar Sewak. The petitioner
was selected for appointment on the said post after following
due process and guidelines. In this regard, letter no.(Mu)8
dated 1st September, 2007 was issued to the petitioner from
the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Jamtara. He joined on
the said post at Dashin Bahal Block pursuant to the office order
as contained in memo no.1166 dated 22nd September, 2007
issued by the respondent no.4. Thereafter, he was sent for
training in the year 2008 and he successfully completed the
said training and to that effect, a certificate was issued to him
on 6th September, 2008 by the Director, State Rural
Development Institute, Hehal, Ranchi. The petitioner made
several representations before the respondents for
regularization of his service, but no order has been passed.
The respondents are duty bound to consider that the petitioner
has been working on the said post in Jamtara district for last
15 years and as such, his claim for regularization of services
must be considered.
3. In support of the said submissions, learned counsel for the
petitioner puts reliance on the judgments rendered by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Narendra Kumar
Tiwari & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., reported in
(2018)8 SCC 238 and Sheo Narain Nagar & Ors. Vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., reported in (2018)13
SCC 432 as well as the judgment rendered by a co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No.2409 of 2019 (Nirmal
Dhodray & Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhkand & Ors.).
4. Ms. Khushboo Kumari, learned A.C. to G.P.IV appearing on
behalf of the respondents submits that the petitioner's claim
for regularization will be considered by the competent authority
in accordance with law.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering
the petitioner's claim that he has been working as Gram Rojgar
Sewak since 2007, he is given liberty to prefer a fresh
representation before the respondent no. 4 seeking his
Regularization of services. On receipt of the said
representation, the respondent no.4 after calling for the
relevant records from the concerned office shall take an
appropriate informed decision in accordance with rules,
regulations and guidelines as well as keeping in view the
aforesaid judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The said decision
shall be taken by the respondent no.4 within three months
from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
6. It is also observed that while taking the said decision, if the
respondent no.4 finds that cases of other similarly situated
persons are also required to be considered, he is at liberty to
do so.
7. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and
direction.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Sanjay/
