IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7995 of 2002 SURESH PRASAD YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 7. 10.02.2009 Heard leaned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. On the own showing of the petitioner, he was appointed on daily wage basis as a Road Roller Driver in 1992.The respondents in their counter affidavit have stated that he has been disengaged on 27.1.1999. Learned Counsel for the petitioner dispute the fact of disengagement. These are facts which cannot be examined in writ petition. The law stands clear that the person appointed on daily wage holds no post and therefore question of his regularisation does not arise. Regularisation cannot be a mode of appointment. Learned Counsel for the petitioner sought to persuade this Court that the petitioner was removed to be substituted by another daily wage appointee, which the respondents dispute. The issue relates to the appointment of a Road Roller Driver in Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar. The respondents cannot resort to adhocism by appointment on daily wage at the whims and fancies of individual officer which may be changed from time to time. The respondents are obliged to make regular appointment on sanctioned post of Rural Development Department only unless any policy decision be taken by the Government in this regard otherwise. Any ad hoc appointment existing on this date shall therefore cease within six months leaving the respondents without any Road Roller Driver for which faults shall lie entirely upon them. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)