IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4583 of 2007 Shivji Mistry, Son of late Manna Paswan, R/o Mohalla- Ranipur Khaki, P.O.- Jhauganj, Patna City, District- Patna … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, through the Commissioner-Cum- Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 2. The Director of Survey, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna 3. The Deputy Director of Survey, Survey Office, Gulzarbagh, Patna … … Respondents ----------- For the Petitioner :M/s S. Parasmani & Prashant Kumar, Advocates For the State :Mr. Kundan Bahadur Singh, S.C.-22 02/ 14.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order, bearing Memo No. 1049 dated 29.7.2006, Annexure-4 passed by the Land Reforms Commissioner -cum- Commissioner and Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Bihar, Patna whereunder request of the petitioner for regularization on Class IV post in the light of the directions of the High Court contained in order dated 10.12.2004 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5591 of 1999, Annexure-3 has been rejected observing that petitioner is not entitled for any weightage for the past engagement rendered by him as muster roll worker in the survey office, Gulzarbagh, Patna duly certified by the Assistant Director 2 under chart, Annexure-6 to the writ petition. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that for the same relief he had earlier approached the High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 5591 of 1999 along with Md. Kamrul Haque and others in which the State- respondents had filed counter affidavit stating that the muster roll workers will be granted benefit of their past experience provided they had served as muster roll worker continuously for six months. 4. From the chart, Annexure-6, it appears that petitioner served as muster roll worker for 123, 260, 287, 250, 275, 265, 235, 266, 255,235 and 61 days in the year 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991 respectively, but has not been given the weightage perhaps for the reason that he has not rendered continuously engagement for six months. It is common knowledge that muster roll workers are not engaged on Sundays and holidays, which is also evident from the chart, Annexure-6. 5. In the circumstances, while setting aside the impugned order dated 29.7.2006, Annexure-4, I direct the competent authority to reconsider the case of the petitioner 3 for regularization taking into account the engagement rendered by him as muster roll worker provided he has served as such for 180 days in any calendar/ financial year continuously excluding Sundays and holidays. 6. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)