ww. s'snuii ^^IS^:. ......•^::jS[%---""" •>^^- ^~^ &^e" IN THE HIGH COUaTOF^CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fCGIl WRITPETITION ^lfcfe /2006 $ PETITIONER Rajkumar Rajak, aged about 39 years son of Shri Ganesh R.am Rajak, occupation - service, Chowkidar, (Under Daily Wages) Public Works Department, Rest House - Bilaspur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of Public Works, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C-.G.') -t. Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, Raipur (C.G.) S?X. ••'.''i ^3. Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Division, Distt. Bilaspyr (C.G.) Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division No.l, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub Division Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE ^^ '^s^ ."//s;^ XI-HC-78 3I]^T^irl<.fi+ (raT3n^6sht<i<ti tTTtTCtlShHlcb 3^ '<I|A|ICI<(, ®-rfl<l'l6,fsldiuy T^..i.C>.-^.^-M.61. ^ 200^ 3T1^?T 4aw ('icl(^GlS'ST) s^TWtriN'sn^T 11-8-2006 Mr. A.N. Bhakta, counsel f|?r the petit'ioner. '. Sumesh B(y<y, 6ovt| advance copy. Heard both the counsel. By this writ petitkin under wage empioyees who are workin^ considered for re9ularisation and asked for details and particulars <tii<itci'in-f t<i4<'Tl'fftec^<Ri«i< ^isri^Tsn^r Advocate for- the State/respondents, on Articte 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a tlirection to the respondents for regularizing his sefvices after taking into con^ideration his senior'ity. The petitioner's case is th^t he was emptoyed on daily wage basis as a o Chowkidar in the category of Cl^iss-IV employee prior to 31-12-1988 and titl then without any interruption, t^e petitioner is re9ularly workin9 on the said post. The erstwhite State of M^dhya Prcdesh took a decision thot the doily on or before 3l*t December, 1988 shoil be respondent No.3 vide order dated 28-4-2004 |»fthe employees/workers who are working on daily wage basis for the purpos4 of their re9ulorisation and in pursuance of that, a !ist Annexure P-2 dat+d 28-7-2004 was submitted in which the petitioner's name has been sfiown at serial No.17. In spite of the representations, the case of t^e petitioner for- regularisation is not being decided even though the persons , Therefore,learned couns^ brin9 thls anomoly to the notic^ "•»; junior to hins have been regulca'ized. |t for the petitioner submits that in order to of respondent No.3, the petitioner may be allowed to make a detailed repre^entation to r-espondent No.3 <md respondent P.T.O. ,•*• XI-HC-78 SfT^T^iTf^IW gqrsn^i'ginN; Soma *TT<-i^irsb*ncb 3^'qraRTO', ®TTly'is,Ridiyy .^.:y.:±\^/. 'CT?[ 200^ 3T[^?T Tgg? (yi(^ctqiC) s^nwdlina'n^T ^^ No.3 be directed to decide the the State/respondents has no ol Having heard iearned and circumstances of the case the case, the request made by ond reasonable, Therefore, representation roisin9 all his gri and its onnexures to res[ respondent No.3 is directed to from the date of its receipt petitioner, in an objective mannerl With the directions Parties are entitled for ce| counlsel ailid tHe pond^nt afore^aid TPlfepft^ WRff if 1Wt rf^RSR ^i sff^ir sri^r ^ame, to which learned coudsel appearin9 for bjjection. for the parties, having regard to the facts without expressing any opinion on merit of 14ar-ned counsel for the petitioner is just, fair petitioner is allowed to make a detailed svancss annexing o copy of the wrst petition No.3 wlthin ten days from today and decide the representation within one month ^rfter considering the points rcnsed by the |, on its own merits, in aGcordance with lcn». e^aid, tiie petition stands disposed of. ^tified copy sf this order. Sd/- L.C. Judge o P.T.O. <So ,*