-HC-22 311^1 ^il R-f[+ sf^a ?t)*iier» +i%a v' 'Tn? -'<WH<LI, yfllwi®,I««ii'yy 3TT^?T ira^? ^ HWWI Sh1|ch""""""""""""""'""""'W^ 200 'I^^T' 3ii^?i ^^iim ^f??f (Sinqle Bench; Hon'ble (Petition under Art.^ PETTTtONER Lal +ilfcf<i1-< 'WRif'?^6 <fat<;l< ^3lf:aH3II^T Wr. Justice bhirendra Mishra) WritPetitito (s) No.5667/08 |26 of Coi}?titution of India) |it Banchor, S/o Shri Narayan Banchor, aged ab^ut 37 years, employed as Sweeper, Health C>4partment, Office of Municipal Corporation, Qi^rg, Residing at: Siddharth Nagar, Kali T^mple.Durg-491001 (C6) RESPONbENTS -Versus^ 1. 2. 3. 17.12.2008 Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocat State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secrstary, .Seneral Administration Department, &.KS. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur. The Commissioner. Directorate of Town Administration and Oevelopment, Raipur. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Durg. for the petitioner. Mrs. Smita 6hai, Panel Lawyej- for the State. Mr. A.S. Kachchawaha, Adv. ffpr respondent No.2 &3. Heard. Grievance of the petitionef' is that the petitioner was engaged as Sweeper on daily wage in the yearlp90. Mis services were duly regularized vide order of Annexure P-2dated7.8.20p8 by the respondent Municipal Corporation. However, vide subsequent order |dated 3.9.2008 respondent No.3 without providing any opportunity of hearir^ to the petitioner, cancelled the order of Annexure P-2 pertainin9 to the p|etitioner, set aside his regularization and ordered that his appointmentshall dontinue as before. 1 XI-HC-22 an^r^iT R'fi.i* SDcRI ?h+1l<=ti 'Hf^t \ 4 -sy ^i|4|id^, (i^flti'ld, ^i'ii^i'1- sniOT xrarg? IWCTI aiHich""'""""" ^FF^ 200 '^^.r' sn^i'^gwdfCT —z- Learned counsel for the peti't|ioner submits that the impugned order of Annexure P-3 has been passed witho]ut affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. On the other hand, learned c| that the order of regularization was| engaged as daily wage employee anc| impugned was passed. However, hef been passed without affording opp<] therefore, he has no objection if t| respondent Municipal Corporation to regularization of the petitioner <] opportunity of hearing to the petition| In view of the above submisl chi^I<n41i *iH<?if^ ^L^ <r=i<^,i< ^7Slfi(TO 311^1 ^iunsel for respondent No.2 & 3 submitted wrongly passed. The petitioner was never in fact, his services were obtained as a substitute sweeper (awagee) and he v^as allowed to work in place of one sweeper namely Sulekha and when this misfake was ultimately detected, the order airly submits that theaforesdid order has rtunity of hearing to the petjtioner and ie petition is allowed with liberty to the pass appropriate orders in the matter of ifter due enquiry and after affording zr. iion of Mr. Kachchawaha, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 <& 4, t|ie instant petition is allowed and impugned order of Annexure P-3 dated 3.9.200p is set aside. However, respondent No.2 <& 3 shall be at liberty to pass appropriajt'e orders in the matter of regularization of the petitioner afresh after affording Certified copy as per rules. opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge