IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3826 of 2009 Chakradutta Mishra . Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors . ----------- 2. 18.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was appointed on daily wages in 1980. On his own showing he worked in that capacity till 1988. Seeking the relief for regularization he unsuccessfully moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8374 of 2003 and L.P.A. No. 546 of 2006 preferred against the same by him was also dismissed on 18.5.2004. Matters thus attained finality. On basis of a policy decision of 1990 well available to him when the aforesaid cases came to be disposed, he again filed C.W.J.C. No. 2850 of 2006 which in an enbloc manner along with several other such matters came to be referred to a three men Committee without examining the individual facts of each case. His claim has been rejected by the committee also on 27.5.2008. C.W.J.C. No. 2850 of 2006 was apparently barred by principles of constructive res judicata/res judicata. Daily wagers hold no post and therefore have no claim for regularization. Reference may only 2 be made to a recent decision of the Supreme Court in 2010(9) SCC 247 (State of Karnakaka Vs. M.L. Kesari). A claim for regularization pre-supposes that the person is in service. If the petitioner was out of service for long years since 1988 it had to be a case for a fresh appointment and not regularization. Regularization is not a mode of appointment. From any aspect of the matter, the petitioner has no claim in the law. The writ application stands dismissed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)