COURT OP CHHATFISGARH AT WftS'atS Ramcsh Chandra Vaisbnay s/o Radha Chandi-a aged abozit 54 years, R/'o BarEiiiikale, District Raigarh(CG) Vs. 1. State 3. of Chhattisgarh Throiigh Secretaiy, Water Resources Departtnent, Dau Kalyan Suigh Bhawan, Raipur(CQj Enguieer-in-Chief, Water Resources Depsrtiaeat Raipur(CG) Executive Etigineer, Water Resourees Division, Raigarh(CG) •a ^ QQi S-rf&S CO?^S?STUTSGB OE> S?®IA Shri S.P.Kale, Counse] for The petitioner. Shri Suiaeet Venna, Paael Lawyer for tlie State on advaoce copy. IQ] '• 1.2 siTiBn SIL KUNAR Heari finally witb the conaent oftjie parties. I^eanied counsel for the petitioner siibniits that the petitioner was appointed prior to 31. 12.1988 and at present. he is workmg as a Daily Wage Einpioyee in Water Resoiirces Departinent at Bai-amkela, He submits that the petitiouer prays for a relief in terms of tlie judgment. and oifier passed by the Supreine Coiirt in the case of SecrettlFfl, State of Kwna.ttllcts. Sa others V&, UvnaS.eoi & others and Mineral 's.esn. The Supneiiie Court in the case of SeciT-taiy, State of Kamataka. anrl Others(Supra), in para 53 has hejd as under: 53.... The giiestion of regiMarization of the seniices ofsi^ch. ernployees may Svive to hc oonsidered on ments in fiie Kghi of thf; pmiciples setiled hy th.is Couri in the cases aboue W.P. (•S'iNo.7n56/2007 refen-ed to and. in tfw Kght of ffti's jufJfynent Jn thn.t contp.xl., th.R llnion of Tndia, tfw. Siaie Goveminent aiv^ ilwir insiniTnenlaKties shjovld take steps io regiilarize as a one- tiiri.e measure, the sennces of sudi in-egiilaziij appointed, w}io Ji.a.ve worked for ten yem~s or jnore in. fbily sand.ionf.d posis hut not uiider c'over of orders qf tiie coufts or of iribunals and should fiai.her fnfs'ure ihai regitlar recraitments are undertakcn. to fill those vacant sa.nctioned posts thai reqijiire 1o be fined up; fn. cases wlzere ternporartf errtployees or datty wagers are hp.mg now employed- Th.p. process nvjfyt he set in motion wiihin six months frorn th.is date. We also darify that regulans;alwf\ if any already made, but rvoi sub judice, need. rmt be reopened based on this jiiclgme'at, but ihere sh.ould he no fin-ther bypassing of tfvs cnnsiitij.tioil.ai requiremRnt and re'giiicsjvsng or makirig penrin.nent, tfuise jmt duly appoiriled as per 1he conslitutional sclueijw' Having hcard leamed coiinsel for ttie parties, having regard to t.he facts and cii'ciirostances of the case atid without expressing any opiiiion on merita of fae case, the i-equest laade by leamert coiinsel for the petitioBer is allowed, which appears to be just, fair and reasonable. Therefore, the petitioner is allowed to inake a detailei'i representatioTi, i-aising aB his grievancfs annexing a copy of tb.e writ. petition and its annexiines to the concem.ed aiithority witbin a period of 3 weeks fron-i today and tlie concemed autl-iorily is directed to decide the i-epresentation at the eariiest, in an objective mauner, on its own iiierits in accordance wit.h 1aw. However, fliis s1ia)1 be siibject to verificatiou df docuinents regarding appomtraent of the petitioner prior to 31.12.1988, wliich he has ciaiined in his wnt pctition. Tbe petition stands finafly disposed of. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judse ^U-^Li^