IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.931 of 2010 1. RAJDEO SINGH, S/O LATE SHEOJATAN SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-KHARAT, P.S.-MASAURHI, P.O.- CHATA, DISTRICT-PATNA. 2. JOGA SINGH, S/O LATE LALLU SINGH, R/O VILLAGE AND POST URDINA, P.S.-BARUN, DISTRICT-AURANGABAD. 3. BIRENDRA PRASAD, S/O LATE YOGESHWAR PRASAD, R/O JAI PRAKASHPUR, P.S.-NOORSARAI, DISTRICT-NALANDA. 4. KRISHNA PRASAD, S/O LATE FAUDARI RAM, R/O GOLIBIGHA, P.S.-RAMPUR, DISTRICT-GAYA. 5. ARJUN PANDIT, S/O LATE KALI PANDIT, R/O KEUL BAZAR, P.S.-HULASGANJ, DISTRICT- JEHANABAD. 6. SHRI RAM PRASAD, S/O LATE NARAYAN RAM PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE-NEW SIDHAULI, DALMIANAGAR, P.S.-DEHRI-ON-SONE, POST DALMIANAGAR, DISTRICT-ROHTAS. 7. VIKRAMA PRASAD, S/O LATE GADH RAM, R/O BHUSAULLA, P.S.-AYER KOTTA, P.O.-DARIHUT, DISTRICT-ROHTAS. …………………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, AURANGABAD. 2. DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, AURANGABAD. 3. ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, AURANGABAD. 4. DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, AURANGABAD. 5. DISTRICT WELFARE OFFICER, AURANGABAD. 6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, SONE HIGH LEVEL CANAL CIRCLE, AURANGABAD. 7. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, RURAL ENGINEERING ORGANISATION, AURANGABAD. 8. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, AURANGABAD. …………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 3 20.12.2010 Petitioners have filed this writ application for a direction to the respondents to absorb them in service against substantive vacancies. It is the case of the petitioners that they have been working on daily wages with the respondents since long 2 and their names have also been recommended vide Annexure-3 series. As per settled legal position now, the cases of daily wagers can be considered for regularization and absorption only in the light of the observations of the Constitution Bench judgment in paragraph 44 in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. Vs. Uma Devi and Ors. (2006 (2) PLJR (SC) 363). In the circumstances, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners in accordance with law in the light of the said observations of the Constitution Bench judgment. The decision in this regard, either way, must be taken by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)