GD Single Bench IN THLHIGH COURT OF CHHATI'ISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) w.P. (S) N03L€é§ OF 2011 (Single Bench Service matter) PETITION ERS i 1 . SMT . ANURUPA BHARGAV I m%g aged about 42 years, Da u g’Mew’ o p ’L/‘Exmwidw of — Late Shri Ashok Kumar Mukherjee, Assistant — Programmer P.G.d.C.A., M.A. (Sociology), Polytechnic Commercial Practices, — Sharma, B.Com., P.G.D.C.A., HDDCA ‘ Data — Entry, Computer Operator, Forest — Deptt. Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) JITENDRA SHARMA aged about 35 years, S/o Late Shri Harnarayan Sharma, M.Com., P.G.D.C.A, Data — Entry — Ogerator Forest Division, Raigur (C.G.) AMW‘ /'7%4§\z>< ;§:‘y\ 2. /, Raigur (C.G.) BRAJESH PRAJAPATI Qflg"? Q‘Qéy" § aged about 31 years, S/o Shri M.L. Prajapati (0,.B.c.) P.G.D.C.A. and B.Sc. Comguter — Operatove Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) 3. w NARESH KUMAR SHARMA ' aged about 35 years, S/o Late Shri 5.“ SMT. S. MAMTA NAIDU aged about 37 years, \9 W/o Shri Jayesh Kumar Naidu, M.Com., Diploma-in-Advanced System Management, P.G.D.C.A. Data — Entry - Operator, Forest Division, Raipur (C.G.) 6. SHIVPAL SHARMA, aged about 33 years, S/o Shri Ramesh Lal Sharma, B.Com., P.G.D.C.A. (Computer Diploma) Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) 7. SMT. SUNITA YADAV, aged about 41 years, f NM W/o Shri Kamalnarayan Yadav, H.D.C.A. ' \ ¢%K Data — Entry — Operator, y $ Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) 8. / BHUPENDRA KUMAR DEWANGAN, aged about 30 years, S/o Shri Uma Shankar Dewangan, B.Sc., P.G.D.C.A. Computer - Operator_, Forest — Department, Govt. of C.G. Raipur (C.G.) 9. z DIPAK DASHMER aged about 25 years, S/o Shri Bhupendra Singh Dashmer B.Sc., DCA Data Entry Operator Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) ANAND KUMAR BANCHHOR, u, ‘ C ‘6 L N$nt§ut1§g é“ “t K ‘I 11. 12. 13f 14./ aged abouLjears, S/o Shri G.P. Banchhor, Data Entry Operator, Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) SMT. SUNITA SHARMA, aged about 31 years, W/o Shri Laxman Prasad Sharma, D.C.A. Computer Operator, Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) SMT. ARTI SINGH, aged about 33 years, Widow of Late Shri R.K. Sharma, D.C.A. Computer Operator, Forest Division, Raipur (C.G.) SMT. GITU KANNOJIA aged about 26 years, W/o Shri Vinod Kannojiya, Data Entry Operator, Forest Department, Govt. of C.G. Raipur (C.G.) KRISHNA RAO MATHANKAR, aged about 34 years, S/o Shri Manik Rao Mathankar, P.G.D.C.A. Data Entry_Qperator, Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) LAV KUMAR DEWANGAN, aged about 27 years, S/o Shri Shivratan Lal Dewangan, P.G.D.C.A., B.Sc. (Bio.), Data Entry Operator, E) MAW C9 Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) GANGADAS MAHANT aged about 36 years, S/o Shri Ramayan Das Mahant, B.Com., P.G.D.C.A. Data Entry Operator, Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) ARVIND KOSRE, aged about 34 years, S/o Shri C.L. Kosre, P.G.D.C.A. Data Entry Operator, Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) KHAGESH SAHU, aged about 29 years, S/o Shri Vishwanath Sahu, P.G.D.C.A., Data Entry Operator, Forest — Division, Raipur (C.G.) MOHD. JIVE KAR HAIDARI, aged about 26 years, S/o Late Shri SAfayat Hussain, A.P.D.C.A. (Advance Post) Post Graduation Diploma, In Computer Application Data Entry Operator Forest Division, Raipur (C.G.) TEJ BAHADUR SINGH BHUWAL aged about 31 years, S/o Shri Ramadhar Singh, Computer Diploma, 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. W‘W x (A D.C.A., B.A. Data Entry Operator, Forest Department, Govt. of C.G. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS Through:- principal Secretary, Forest Department, Govt, of Chhattisgarh, Secretariat, D.K.S. Bhawan, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.) PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST Forest — Department Govt. of C.G. Aranya - Bhawan, Medicai College Road, Raipur (C.G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA @ 1/ STATE OF CHHATrISGARH, HIGH COURT OF CHI-IATTISGARH z BILASPUR 9% SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVAJ. w.P. (s’ No. 3563 of 201 1 Smt. Anurupa Bhargav & Ors. Versus Vb, State of Chhattisgarh 85 another f Petition 111A 226 of the Constitution of India Appe ce: Shri V.G.‘Tamaskar, counsel for the petitioners. ORAL-ORDER (Passed on 6.7.20 1 1) Heard on admission. 1. This petition has been med by the petitioneig praying for issuance of direction to respondents to regularize their services on the post on which they are worldng. It has also been prayed that as the petitioners have been .worh'ng against the vacant posts continuously for more than 240 days, even if respondents failed to absorb their services, respondents be directed to pay compensation to the petitioners at the rate of RSJO lacs per petitioner. t i ‘*\ 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been appointed to work as Data Entry Operator on various dates since the year 2000. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that as all the petitioners have been worked continuously .ww.ww..w...... for more than 240 days, respondents are under an obligation to regularize their services. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 19th April, 2006 passed in W.P. No.1781/03 and other connected matters, has allowed the claim of daily wage employees and has directed for their regularization and the SLP preferred against that order was withdrawn by the State in the Supreme Court. Therefore, the respondents are not justiiied in denying claim of regularization by placing reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, state of Knrnataka and others Vs. Umadevi (3} a» others, (2006t4 SCC j_.. It is further submitted that the respondents in all fairness ought to consider the case of the petitioners for absorption as they have been working since long and their action of initiating process to fill-up those posts is illegal, unfair and arbitrary. On petitioners’ own showing, the petitioners have been appointed on job rate. It is not the case of the petitioners that they were appointed after following regular process of selection in accordance with constitutional procedure. In view of the law laid 1 down by the Supreme Court in the case of Umadevi (supra), no direction for regularization can be issued merely because the petitioners have completed 240 days of work in the establishment. Even if a workman has worked for a continuous period of 240 days in one calendar month, it does not give right to a claim for regularization. If a workman is sought to be retrenched, the workman is only entitled to payment of retrenchment compensation. The claim of regularization therefore cannot be entertained. In case the petitioners seek benent of standard standing orders or any other Labour Law providing for classiflcation as permanent employee, the appropriate remedy for the petitioners is to approach the Labour Court constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, or in the case of ‘scheduled p industry’, before the Labour Court under the provisions of Chhattisgarh Industrial Relations Act, 1960. In the petition, there is no ave1 ment that the petitioners are entitled to be declared as peimanent employee under any standing standard orders or any other rule applicable to them. 4. The order dated 19m April, 2006 passed in W.P. No.1781/03 is clearly distinguishable on facts. That was a case of daily wage employee who claimed regularization under a policy of regularization. In view of authoritative pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of Umadevi (supra), no direction for regularization can be issued, except for limited case where persons have completed 10 years of service and entitled to be considered for regularization as a one time measure strictly in ,. accordance With the direction of the Supreme Court for such limited cases. If some of the petitioners claimed that they are entitled for regularization as one time measure in View of the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Umadevi (supra) and as per the policy framed by the State Govt. for regularization, such petitioners may approach the State Govt. for consideration of their cases, if not already regularized. 5. The petition is accordingly iinaily disposed of. ./v// ’// Sé" “(‘VastaVa “Mgr;