BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S)No. Q>%(7> OF 2W2on K PETITIONER :— Bajrang s/o Mulchand,aged about . ‘ & VERSUS QXGQ’ § ....... “ 30 years,occupation- Daily wages ’ employee relating to work of cleansing sanitation,conservancy,c/oPresident, .. eh:\x I 0‘.WVW prakosth Distt.Rajnandgaon ,Rajnandgaon (C.G.). , wi‘ryRESPONDENTS z— 1’ State of Chhattisgaih, Through the Secretary, Department of Town Administration 85 Development, Government of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.). 2f/TheMunicipa1 Corporation, Rajnandgaon,Through the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) M WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA W PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER:— As mentioned in cause title above. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS:~ As mentioned in cause title above. g .‘° ' %\r;ow \pi a\ C.G.Karmchrisangh,Safai Kamgar K ? CD39 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WR!T PETlTlON S NO.683 OF 2011 PETITIONER Bajrang Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Another (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J‘ Present :- Shri Sudhir Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.V. Sridhar, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal‘ Advocate for the respondent No.2. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 4m day of February, 201 1) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Being aggrieved by the action of the respondent Municipal WM Corporation to remove the daily wagers pursuant to the memo dated 23-9—2010 (Annexure ,— P/1), the petitioner has preferred this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to continue his services as daily wager and to take steps to regularize his services. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the similarly situated cases came up for consideration before this Court and after considering all the aspects of the matter, this Court allowed those writ petitions by order dated 20-1~2011 passed in Dhaniram & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others‘ and other connected matters. 4. In the identical issue, the Municipal Corporation, Rajnandgaon, represented through Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate. After r hearing all the parties, the order has been passed. The issue is one and the same and, as such, the matter is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Dhaniram (supra). 5. In view of foregoing, this petition is also allowed in terms of the decision of this Court in Dhaniram (supra). r 6. There shall be no order asto costs. Sd/-' Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Gowri 1WP (S) NO.6798 of 2010 (decided on 20-1-201 1)