1 CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.2301 OF 1992 -------- In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. -------- 1. Amar Kumar Singh, Son of late Anant Prasad Singh, resident of Village and Post Office- Madrauni, Via-Naugachhiya, District-Bhagalpur, at present working as Junior Engineer, Maheshi Block, District Saharsa. 2. Shiv Shankar Singh, son of Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, resident of Village and Post Office Hati, Via-Sukhpur, District-Saharsa, at present working as Junior Engineer, Kishanpur Block, District- Supaul. 3. Md. Firoz Alam, Son of Md. Daud, resident of Village-Bhakrahi, Post Office-Kadampura, District-Supaul, at present working as Junior Engineer, Sonbarsa Block, District-Saharsa. 4.Tribhuwan Prasad, Son of Sri Ramswarup Sah, resident of Village and Post Office-Koharwa, Police Station-Sonbarsa, District-Sitamarhi, at present working as Junior Engineer, Nirmali Block, District-Supaul ------ Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Nirman Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 3. The Commissioner Rural Engineering Organization, Government of Bihar, Nirman Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 4. The Engineer in Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Nirman Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 5.The Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Nirman Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna. 6. The Director, Rural Employment, District Rural Development Agency, Saharsa. 7. The Executive Engineer, National Rural Employment Programme, Saharsa. 8. The Block Development Officer, Maheshi Block, District-Saharsa. 9. The Block Development Officer, Sonbarsa Block, District-Saharsa. 10. The Block Development Officer, Kishanpur Block, District-Supaul. 11. The Block Development Officer, Nirmali Block, District- Supaul. 12. The District Magistrate, Saharsa. 13. The District Magistrate, Supaul. 2 14. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Saharsa. 15. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Supaul ---- Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioners : None. For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kumar Verma, Assistant Counsel to Standing Counsel No.3. ---------- P R E S E N T ------ THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE K.MANDAL S. K. Katriar, J. The four petitioners have joined this writ petition for a direction, inter alia, seeking the following reliefs: “ Whether the petitioners who have worked for more than 3 years i.e. more than 240 days and have the minimum requisite qualification are entitled for regularization of their service against the permanent vacant posts?” 2. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. The Collector of the district of Saharsa had issued an advertisement inviting applications from graduate engineers for appointment on daily wages. The petitioners applied, were selected, and were given employment on daily wages, by order dated 11.12.1985 (Annexure-1), for a specific programme, namely, National Rural Employment Programme. The same clearly stipulated that their employment would not confer any right of regularization in service. The work, however, 3 assigned to them were extended from time to time. The District Magistrate of Supaul issued letter dated 1.7.1992, addressed to all the Block Development Officers in the district of Supaul to discontinue engagement of the petitioners and others. Hence the present writ petition. 3. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned Government Counsel. It appears to us on a perusal of the advertisement that this was a local/ad hoc arrangement to meet the needs of a particular programme. The position is evident from paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit, and is reproduced hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference: “5. That before giving parawise reply to the writ application, the following facts are necessary. The petitioners were working on daily wages under the N.R.E.P. Scheme for development of Rural Areas. The aforesaid project was not a permanent scheme, rather it was for a short period in different areas according to the needs and requirements. In the Scheme, some technical hands were required for supervision of the work and for measurement etc.” 4. Furthermore, the initial appointment clearly stipulated that the engagement on daily wages shall not confer any right, including that of confirmation in service. Furthermore, it was an entirely local arrangement, and the selection 4 process was not conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission. It is also evident that the petitioner had last worked up to 1992. It appears that the writ petition does not set up any case of enforceable right. We do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. ( S.K. Katriar, J.) (Kishore K. Mandal, J.) Patna High Court. Dated 13th January, 2010. Vinay/ NAFR.