SINGLE BEMCH^ o, p rj0-.'; /- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF aiHATnSGARN AT BILASPUR W.P.NO^I^ /2005 PETITIGNERS ^ (1) Sant Bam> son of Shri Dhana Ram, M^-^^^cr^^.... ^j^-i.-;-—--':'^ .^y <-i^""" ^" J'v^ ^a ^" ^.< ^-:^:: //. 7^" ll ^' ^" aged about S(5 years* (2) Dilharan Sahu, son of Shri Dhana Raro, aged about 35 years. (3) Akila Khara, daughter of Shri Ustaffe aged about 33 years. (4) Archna Sahu, s@n of Steri Chhedi Lal aged about42 years» (5) GautaBtt Kaiwarth, son ef Shri Baiga- Ram» aged about 40years« (6) Bharat Sahu SOB of Gendlal Sahy, aged 39 years* (7) Vijai Kumar» son ef Ganga Rara Patel aged 41 years» (8) ©ayaRaro Paswan son of Shri Sashil Paswan, aged about 42years* (9) Ra.lktimar Yadav, son of Shri Ram Pra- sad Yadav, aged 36 years* ( All Petitioners are C/0 Stiri Kailash Soni, son of Shri Gend lal Soni R/0 VERSUS Sakari, TahsU Sakari, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ^^ RESPONDENTS ^ (1) The Municipal Corporation Bilaspur throygh Aclministrator Bilaspur (C<G») (2) The Comaissioner Municipal Corpora- tion, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) (3) State Qf Chhattisgarh threugh Secre- ^ ...'.... . , .. . ... . . . ... -. -. '.. - • •-....-.- • -..' ...- .. - ... - tary» Departraent ef Local Self Govt* D»K-»S« Bhawan Raipur (Qihattisgarh) WRIT PETITIGN UNDER ARTia.^S 226/227 OF THE GONSTITOTION OF ¥NDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT/WRITS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORABI AND FOR DIRECTI(»I/ DIRECTIONS.ORBER.ORDERS.. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Siagle Beach: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. W. P. No. 5119 OF 2005 Petitioners Respondents Versus Saiit Raia and ofhers The Miinicipal Corporation, Bilaspur & others Shri J.S. Baraik, counsel for the petitioners. Shri P. Diwakar, Senior counsel wifh Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, cozuisel for fhe respondents No. 1 aiid 2, None for fhe respondent No. 3. ORAL ORDBR (29th March, 2006? 1. The petitioners have fUed tliis petition pra3^ing that tiie respondents be du'ected to appoint the petitioners as daity wages einployees ia corapUmice of fhe order dated 21.8.1997 passed by flie Supreine Coiirt ia CivU Appeal No. 104/1996. The petitioners have further prayed that flie respondents be directed to take fheni ia eiiiployi&eut iDiniediately. 2. Shri P. Diwakar, Senior couiisel with Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, counsel appearmg for fhe respondeiits No. 1 and 2 clearly stated ia theu' afSdavit dated 24.3.2006 that the petitioners have been appouited vide letter dated 20.9.2005. SS^^E-s.a.a"-—-"' V 1^®? g^-^"" w^" 3. Leanied couusel for the petitioners admits the position fhat fhe petitioners have been appoiated on daily wages basis and as such nofhiag sun^ives ia fhis petition. 4, However, leamed cozinsel appeanng for flie petitioners raakes aa oral submission that fhe petitioners be graated parity at the pay scale of regular eniployees of fhe Goverameut. The petitioners have not submitted auy pleadiags and have not made aiiy piayer to this effect ia the petition. Hence, this prayer caanot be graated ia fhis petition, However, fhe petitioners are at liberty to agitate fhe sanie, if so advised m separate proceedings. 5. In view offhe foregonig, fhe writ petitioii staiids disposed of No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Bablu