Hiwi'i C$U§1‘ 3F CHHA?HSGARH EILA FUR i ‘ yErrt Pemlgn N04~5$843£j 2QQ§¢ I géPetTiiion‘e; v Dema Ram $mha $50 i-aaaufdm Eamha. aged about "F years R'G Kanharpur. . RrstExTahsii Cumar Distt Durg(CG) I . I 3! veTSU§ n s“. Vi " g§R ép wdents Sfate‘ of Chha‘it'ogarh tamuuh 3*3 / Seaman .Water Resamces Dcga'tmemi v E 1 Z i . DKS Bhavan Paapur 2. - Chief Wa$ef Engme‘e Raseulmrées M aDept‘Raépur hanadi Water Pwject, 3. Sub Di‘r'siomal Offinsr Mahanadi Water ’ Management Sim Davasmn Ne 1 Gurwr Dlstt DLrg, (”G; (Writ Petitien under Ariiae 225i227 of the Cmsti’miian cf India} . $3: Han’bie MK; Satish K: ggnihmfi, “5. 3h Y S Th Ad Q r; akur Dépuiy vmai¢ héawra’ Wm} “hm M P r ; Bhatia Eeputy Gavt Advac 9R‘M. €§REER g9a5snd nn *ms 5ihaay ewentnmber, was) W‘ik the conse’wi cf warned counsei appearma ‘0; tne partiea the "matte. is heard fmaiiy i x I 2‘) he petitimer seeks a diremon to ihe reapondents thak ihe peii‘tioner may be reinstated m. servme Wii aii {nc conéequemnai beneTits in View of €he crder datedr3G-5-ZQU2 {Annexure PM}: } I 3) 5W“. Deshmukh, ieamed counse§ appeariag fer the pétitEraer submits i'ha‘t the petitioner was awointed as dam] w e empioveei’werker on i‘ne Ipost raer were disengaged when he attamed the aae oi 55 yeare With efiect frem 31-h 20G3 (Annexme P11) x .. i - a‘f Choukidaar The services m ihe gem: ai ' Befare that a demswn Mas taken to the effeci that me persons upto the age ' : cf 60 yearo may be engaged can daily wage nasas ‘ x ,é)‘ Be that as h may, it is we“ $ei‘tied pfincipies of 3am: that ihe E ppointment en ciaiiv ‘waaes is net in accordance wiih 521w am} de has the > i canstituuonai scheme af empkyymem The ahpcmtment of the petmcner dmittediy, was m3» n accordance mi”: comiiiutcnai scheme e? empioymeni s thefe was r0 adwrtasement Iriwtmg apphcabons ffom ali the mgab} cawdidates or thmumh emaiwment exchange fhus the appomtmeni itself is ‘ at iega. cven if the emp ayer takes a dec’sien to empioy a perscm on deéay wages unto 60 years the petmona is moi emmed i0 any rehef as the nomtment of the petitioner an daily wages éees not ccnfer my raghi on the etmcnei ir the vase 0n hand mrcuiar ciated 36-5-3302 ‘Armevure PM; hed an by the pentacner is not Issued by the State of Crmamsgarh but by we $tate 0f M P after bafurcatlor, of the Staie of W’i P 5); The Hon bie Supreme Court fn je ceiera OW aecisaans has feeorica 1y heid that appemtmem en deiw wages canfraci and iemeorarv ‘ not m accordance math Saw and de here me cons’iaimaonai scheme cf ! empioymerat; §s net a preper er iega§ appefmtment. We petitioner‘has web acquired any right to the posi: as his appointéieni was new: accordance'Wim > hecomtitutienai scheme gf appointment. i ) ‘ ir‘ “he matter of India; mugs & Pharmaceuticafe Ltd Vs orkmen; indian Drugs :5. Pharmaceutieais Ltdt the Supreme Cewt observed a; unuer “34 Thus it is welt sett ed that there is m right i »eeted m any deity-wag to seek regularieaiien eguiansaiion gan oniy b done in accomance With ‘ ; the rules and net die here the ruleei in ERamamsman v. siat cf Keiia this awn heid ; that there can be no requisation tie hers the ruies ,The‘ same View was takhen in Kishare {DE} v; State 9f i Maharashtra, Um'm 0f inia v. Biehamiaei’ Duff. The 1 3' é a a } a e ap p re y? i E W e ii ; drectéen issued me Services Tribunai far {egularizmg the Sawicer of persons who had mt been appointed on mguiar basis in accwdance wiih the rmes was set aside although the petitigner had been woyking reguiany for a iong iime 35 in ourlnder Smah Jamwa/ (m) v 3M9 of J&K s1: was heid that ad has appomtment dges net gava any right tar regularisation as reguiamatam is governed bv *he statutory mies 1V Furrher In the matter of $teate af i! P and athers Vs litesh Ra the 7) Sureme Court Observed as unde p f “7. Whatever may be the gimport and purport-of such tegutertsaticn rutes, m Vtew at the recent Constitution Beuch decisten of this our: in Secy; , State of Karnetake VS Urradew It is now well t settaed that tne appmntmeute at made m vmattoe 9f the constitutaoual scheme of equality as enshfmeci 1 uwder Amete 14 and 1$ Of the Car tatution of indga weuld be rendered Mega! and thus word ab ‘nriro Ne reguiarrsatron ruiesdherefore couid have been 'I made by the Etate of Utter Predesh m derogatren of he statutory or a constrtuhonql scheme” as stated above t0 the facts w Jv r case the petitioner cannot claim any regurarizatron or reinstatement m semce on the besrs o: his appomtmerrt which was an deity Waqes basis and n accordance With law and de ers the constitutions! scraeme not i h at ‘ mpi eoymeht 9) : ' t 8) Appiytng the wen settied prmcrples : e? the Accordingly,'the petittoh ts diSmissed. No orderasto costs. Sd/- Saush K. Agmhom Judge 1 . (2607) 1 SC 4m 2‘ 2t1‘G7 1 SCC 257 r i by ' ' f r C ()