^, ? B. •„ , n 5° ^^S'-l^l^ 81NGLE IN THE mGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W. P. (S) No. S'?72-/ /2006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Cs. G v\ X^^wr Mahetm Ram S/o Shri Bhaiya Ram ,,/- R/o Badi Koni, Birkona Magra BUaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh /' Through :- Secretary, Department ofPublic Works, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Engineer-in-Chief, ••' Public Works, Department Raipur (C.G.) 3. Supermtending Engineer, f Public Works, Department Bilaspur Division, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Executive Engineer,, Public Works, Department Division No.l Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA !4/ ^g7 7^-7 HI6H COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTIS6ARH: BILASPUR Singls Bench: Honble Shri Satish K. iAgnihotri, J. P. (S) No. 5514 of 2006 Petitioner Versus Mahetru Kam State of Chhattisgarh & Others 5hri S.P. Kale, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwiyedi, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State. tth (10W October, 2006} 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wois appointed prior to 31.12.1988 and at present he is working as Labour (class-IVemployee) in the respondents-department as daily wager. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition praying for a relief in terms of the judgment aid order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, Stat®of Kamatcka and Others Vs. Umadevi (3) and Others and Minerai Expiwation Corporation Empioyees' Union v. 3. The Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of and Others (supra), in para 53 has held as under: "53. ...........The question of regutarization of the services of such emptoyees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles setttsd by this Court in the cases abovereferred to and in the light of thls judgment. In •t+iat context, the Union of India, the State Sovernments and their instrumentalities "/. m ;..3f^ f' should take steps to re9ularize as a one-time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten yeoirs or more iri duty sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunals and shoufd further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fil! those vaccnt sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary emptoyees 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, buf not sub judice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further bypassing of the constitutionat requirement and regularising or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme." The Supreme Court in the case of Mineral Exptorotion Corporation Emptoyees' Union (supra) in paro 17 has hetd as under :- "17. It is seen from the above paragraph that this Court directed the Union of India, tiie State ©ovemments<nid their instrumentafities to regularize as a one-time measure, the services of such irregulariy qspointed workman, who have worked for ten years or more in duly ainctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunats and shoutd further ensure that reguhr recr'uitments are undertaking to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now empbyed." 5. Having heard learned counsel for tiie 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 leamed counsel for -t+is petitioner is just, fair cnd reasonable. Therefore^Jiie_ :v 11 li!J^ K.I m I Bablu petitioner is aiiowed to make a detailed representation. raising a!! his grievances annexing a copy of the writ petition and its annexures to the concerned cuthority within a period of ten days from today cnd the concerned outhority is directed to decide the representation wi'thin one mon-rti from the date of its receipt after considering the points raissd by the petitioner, in an objective manner, on its own merits, in accordance with !aw. 6. With the directions aforesaid, the petition stonds disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish KAgnihotri Judge 1{(Z006) 4 SCC 1} 2{JT 2006 (7) SC 151} lv~?-.^-.