IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5440 of 2009 Sakaldeo Malakar Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2/ 22/07/2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner claims to have been appointed on daily wages intermittently in the Department of Mines and Geology. On his own pleadings even that status of his has ended on 1.8.1991. The claim for regularization pre-supposes that the person is in service as otherwise it becomes a question of appointment. Regularization is not a mode of appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner then submits that the respondents may be directed to dispose his representation requesting regularization. The Court cannot make any direction/observation of a positive nature. Let the representation of the petitioner be considered strictly in accordance with his status as a daily wager and the law in that regard laid down in (2006) 4 SCC 1 (STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. Umadevi) explained in (2010)4 SCC 179 (Satya Prakask & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) that daily wagers do not come within the ambit of a one time measure for regularization as they do not hold any 2 post. The application is disposed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)