IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1056 of 2007 1. Umesh Yadav @ Umesh Prasad Yadav, SON OF LATE DHANESHWAR YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHAKLA (NORTH SIDE) P.O. SUKHASHAN CHAKLA, P.S. AND DISTRICT- MADHEPURA. 2. SURENDRA PRASAD YADAV, SON OF LATE SITAL PRASAD YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. PARMANANDPUR, VIA- VADMA, P.S. MURLIGANJ, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA :--PETITIONERS. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. THE SECRETARY, PERSONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE, REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE JOINT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 4. DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, RURAL DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 5. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHEPURA, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA. 6. SPECIAL SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 7. DIRECTOR ACCOUNT ADMINISTRATION AND SELF PLANIS DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, MADHEPURA, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA. 8. DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, MADHEPURA, DISTRICT- MADHEPURA. 9. MANAGING COMMITTEE, D.R.D.A. DISTRICT- MADHEPURA :--- RESPONDENTS. ----------- For the petitioners : Sri Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, A.C. to G.P.21. For Respondent No. 7 : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Advocate. ====== 2. 22.07.2011. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Petitioners were engaged by the D.R.D.A., Madhepura to serve as Peon, Driver. They rendered satisfactory service from the date of their initial engagement in 1987 till 1999 when they were removed whereafter they were again engaged in the year 2004 and finally removed under order bearing Memo No. 933 dated 11th September, 2004, Annexure-20. Aforesaid removal order was challenged before this Court by filing 2 C.W.J.C.No. 15104 of 2004 which was dismissed under orders dated 21.07.2006, Annexure-A to the counter affidavit. 3. Present writ petition has been filed asserting that petitioners having been engaged in 1987 and served the D.R.D.A. to the satisfaction of all concerned, their case is required to be considered for regularization in the light of the Government resolution bearing no. 489 dated 10.05.2005, Annexure-21, whereunder the cut off date for considering the daily-wagers for regularization was extended from 01.08.1985 to 11.12.1990. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in the earlier writ petition petitioners could not rely on the resolution dated 10.05.2005 to submit that as and when D.R.D.A., Madhepura proceeds to make appointment, they should consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the resolution of the State Government dated 10.05.2005, Annexure-21 which inter alia require the State to consider the case of daily-wagers engaged prior to 11.12.1990 for regularization as and when appointment/regularization is made by the organization, where the daily-wager concerned has served. In the light of the resolution of the State Government dated 10.05.2005, Annexure-21, I direct the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Incharge District Rural 3 Development Agency to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization/absorption in the light of the circular dated 10.05.2005 as and when they proceed to make appointment in the D.R.D.A. It goes without saying that while considering the case of the petitioners the authorities of the D.R.D.A. will grant them the necessary age relaxation as also preference for the services already rendered to the Agency. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)