C^- 1 ?o-o^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR(C.G.l W.P.(S)No.......l%A. <:......201ft PETITIONERS ^ ^pff -.s^ ^&y , ^rf ^f J^7 CY/<^; ;iafc^ f s' / ? s J <s? ^ ^ "'J! ^•A. Om Prakash Singh Thakur, aged 42years, S/oShriA.K. Singh Thakur, Clerk, Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) / ^' / Dhal Singh Sharwa, Aged 42years, S/o Late Tijuram Sharwa, L.D.C., Kalyan P.G.College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Naresh Kumar Yadav, age 36 yrs. s/o LateShivPrasad Yadav, Lab. Attendant,, Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Anand Singh Chouhan, aged 44 yrs., S/o Late SherSingh Chouhan,CycleAttendant(Pebn), Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Tulsi Dakshine, aged 40 yrs. S/o Shri SarhjuRam, Cycle Attendant (Peon), Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Ganesh Prasad, aged 38years, S/o Shri Mahadev, Cycle Attendant (Peori), KalyanP.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.Q.) /~J. Parmeshwar Singh Thakur, Aged 39 years, S/o Late Lakhan Singh Thakur, Cycle Attendant (Peon),Kalyan P.G. Cotlege, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 8. MohanLalYaclav,aged33yrs. S/oSahas Ram Yadav, Cycle Attendant (Peon), Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) n'si .<!. 9. 10. ^11. ^- Bholaram Sahu, aged 33 years, S/oJagdishRam Sahu, Cycle Attendant (Peon), Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Mani Kumar, aged 42 years, S/o Late Devendra Kumar Dhurandhar, Mali, Kalyan P.G. College, BhJlai.Distt. Durg (C.G.) Sewa Ram, aged 43years, S/oKartik Ram Sahu, Mali, Kalyan P.G. College, BRilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS ^ (i) ^ (2) TheStateGovt.bfjChhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, HigherEducation DepttMinistry D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner, Directorate of Higher Education, Govt. Science College Premises, Raipur(C.G.) (3) Registrar, Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur(C.G.) .(4) Principaj, Kalyan P.G. College, Bhilainagar, Distt. Durg (C.G.) Writpetition underArticle226/22'7-oftheConstitutionof India for issuanee of mandamus of writ/direction oranv other aDDroDriate writ. "^ ' • . ' ' .-'•••.'.''.' ' " .. . ' . . Petitioners respectfully pray as under:- 1. ParticularsofDetitioners:- Asstated above. 2. ParticularsofFesDond&nts- As stated above. {iky: 4-ii~.. HIGHCOURTOFCHHATriSGARH:BIU\SPUR WRIT PETITION (S)N0.1965 OF 2011 PETITIONERS Om Prakash Singh Thakur Sothers Versus RESPONDENTS The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & othere X- (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 ofthe Constitution oflndja) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyer forthe State. ORDER(ORAU . (Passedon this11t1' day OfApril, 2011) 1. Heard. ' 2. CMallenge in this petition is to the letter date'd 26-8-2009 (Annexure - P/1) passed by the respondent No.2 and. further the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent authorities to regularize their serviceswith all consequential benefits. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petltioners working inthe respondentdepartmentandcompleted 10 years as on 31-12-1 997. Thereafter, proceediftgs were initiated td regularize the services of the dajly wagers includirig the petitioners and in the satd list the namesofthe petitioners find place. In spite of the said facts, the services of the petitioners have not been regularized and all of a sudden by letter dated 26-8-2009, the respondent authorities denied to regularize the services of the petitioners. 4. It ieindisputable that the apppintment of the petitioners on daily wages was not in accordance with law and was de /?o/s the constitutional schemeofemployment. 3? Be that as itmay.itisatritelawtHatadailywagercannotclaim regularization, continuance orreinstatement in service on the basjs of appointment, which was temporary for a fixed period and also ss f,'w,': Gowri s not in- accordanGe with law and th6 same was de hore the constitutional scheme of employment. (See Secretary, State of Kamataka and Others vs. Umadevi(3) and Others1, Indian Drugs& Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v.Workmen,lndian Drugs & Pharmaceuficals Ltd. , OfRcial Liquidator v. Dayanand and others3 and State of Punjaband Othersy. Surjit SinghandOthers). Applying thewell settled principles oflaw to thefacts ofthecase pn hand, the petition deserves to be and is aGCordingly dismissed at themotion stage itself. Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge 1(2006)4SCC1 2(2007) 1 SCC408 3(2008)10SCC1 4 (2009)98cc 514 t»s wx m