^^ y^ ^?^ •" ...^T' SSNRj F R! (7 IN THE mGH COURT QF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P.fS)No.^s'tc? /2QQ6 PETITIONER RESPQNDENTS Philip PUle S/o Shri Saranga Banee / R/o Badi Koni, Bu'kona Magra BUaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through :- Secretary, Department ofPublic Works, Dau Kalyan Smgh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Engineer-in-Chief, / Public Works, Department Raipur (C.G.) 3. Superintendmg En^neer,/. Public Works, Department Bilaspur Divisioii, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Executive Engineer,/ Public Works, Department DivisionNo.l Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION_UNDERARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CQNSTITUTIQNOFJNDIA -7 HI6H COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISeARH: BILASPUR Singl®Bench: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. W. P. (5) No. 5510 of 2006 Petitioner : Philip Pilte Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh & Others Shri 5.P. Kale, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the re O R b E^ tth (10" October. 2006) 1. Learned counset for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed prior to 31.12.1988 and at present he is working as Labour (class-IV employee) in the respondents-department as daily wager. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a relief in terms of the judgment and order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Seeisstary, Stat®of Kamatoka and Othsrs Vs. Umadsvi (3) and Others and Minerel Expioration Corporation Employees' Union v. Mineral Exploration Corporation Limitad & Aw. 3. TTie Supreme Court in the cass of Secrstary, State of Kamataka and Others (aipra), in para 53 has held as under: 53. ...........The question of regularization of the services of such empioyees may hcve to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases abovereferred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State ©ovemmentsand their instrumentalities ^ should take steps to regularize as o one-time measure, the services of such irregutarly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duty sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the court's or of tribunals ond should further ensure that re9utar recruitments are undertaken to filt those vacant sanctioned posts •rfiat require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daity wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularization, if any already made, but not sub judice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there shoutd be no further bypassing of the constitutional requirement and regutarising or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutionat scheme." The Supreme Court in the case of Minerat Exploration Corponition Employees Uhion (ajpro) in para 17 has held as under ;- "17. It is seen from the above paragraph that this Court directed the Union of India, the State Sovernments ond their instrumentalities to regularize as a one-time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed workman, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunals cnd should further ensure that re9utar recruitments are undertaking to fill those vaccmt sonctioned posts that require to be filted up, in ccises where temporary empbyees or daily wagers are being now employed." 5. Having heard learned counset for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the request made by learned counsel for the pstitioner is just, fair and reasonable. Therefore, the n- —i.^=—_—./// ^ petitioner is allowed to make a detailed representation, raising all his grieyances annexing a copy of the writ petition and its annexures to the concemed authority within a penod of ten days from today and the concemed authority is directed to decide the representation within one month from the date of its receipt after considering the points raised by the petitioner, in an objective manner, on its own merits, in aceordance with hw. 6. With the directions aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. No order 03 to costs. Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge Bablu 1{(2006)4SCC1} 2{JT2006(7)S<;151}