c^-^^ Glf :NCH BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITIONrsyNQ. ^^)^ /2010 PETCTCONERS ^ yM^ ^T^ /^ ...A.. ^'^' / y ^' €^/ ^. -/^" RESPONbENTS 17'..^..^^.^f ^^.^.,--^ \ •'f^'"" :/^ %. 7^>^>^..^^^ ^s^^^ '^^^^s^'"'' 1./' -^ Munaku Ram Patel, aged about 41 years, son of Late bhanaram Patel R/o New Chandaniyapara Ward No.07, Janjgir bistt. Janjgir-Champa (CG). 2. ' Santosh Kumar Rathore aged about 36 years, son of Shri Badri Rathore, R/o Bonga Talab, Ward No. 10, Janjgir, and Distt. Janjgir-Champa (CG) 3. ' Hirde Lal Soni aged about 42 years, son of Shri Panchram Soni, R/o Vill. Kosmdeeh, PO Deogaon (Masturi) Tah Masturi, bistt Bilaspur (CG). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Public Works, Mantralaya, Raipur (C&) 2.' Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (CG) 3. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Deptt. bivision - Bilaspur, bistt. Bilaspur (CG) WRIT PETCTCON U/A. 226 OF THE CONSTCTUTCON OF INDIA rr "-7S W^ ^T f<Tli<=h ^CT^Tf^T sFTTN? .-^ ^ + H11CTI ^»W<»» 7^r T^iAii<n^, y-a1^<i<o, fsK'ii-M^ ....^.P..©...l&a..te.?J.^,oo 3TI^T TT?^ (ll<siI^<^T) y^nw^rf?^ ^TT^T SB : Hon'bie Shri i'vlanindra i'vloha 1 Snrivastava. J. '20in Shri ShaiiencSra Sharma, cou Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, Panel |«awyerfor the State. have prayed for issuance .of writ of .6/2/10 and also to regularize the service By this petitlon, petitioners| mandamus to quash the urder date<p of the petitioner. On petitioners own showirfe, it is clear that the petiuoners were appointed as daiiy wage empioy^es in the year ,1987. There are no averments in the petition that the pleutioners were appointed against reguiar vacancies by foilowing reguiar prcfrcess of selection prescribed under the recruitment ruies. The ciaim of the petitioners i^ Learned Gounsei for the petiuoners It is not a case of the petitlon the recruitment ruies and that their (200S) 4 3CC 1, petitioners' ciaim Accordingiy, the petition Is disrnisse^. obi^fd^^ ^Tw^ff"? f^^i <r^^i< ^3fRw 3TT^CT isel for the petitioners. that as. In the past, ia'rge ourriber of daiiy wage employees were regularized ^nder various poiicies of the Government, they are aiso entitled to be reguiariz|ed as they have worked for a long period. ^ubmltted that earlier, a.petition was filed before this Court whicn was dispo^ed off with libeity to make appropriate representation but the representa|:ion fiied by the petitioners has been rejected without going into the merifct. s^rs that they were appolnted according to ^ppointrnents are Irregyiar and not iltegal, Accordingiy, in view of the judgm^nt of the Supreme Court in the of Secretary, State or Karnataka ar^d other-s . v\ Ufpadevi (3) aod others 'or reguiarizatioo is misconcelved in iaw. Sd/- ManindraMohan Shrivastava Judge