IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4117 of 2010 1. BIRENDRA PRASAD S/O LATE LATE VISHWANATH PRASAD R/O MOHALLA - MUTAN NAGAR, NEW COLONY, P.S- CIVIL LINES, DISTRICT- GAYA 2. JITENDAR KUMAR S/O BALESHWAR PRASAD R/O VILLAGE - KUTLUPUR , P.S- KHIZARSARAI, DISTRICT- GAYA 3. MUSTAQUE AHMED S/O SHEIKH ASIMUDDIN R/O VILLAGE -- HETAMPUR , P.S- AURANGABAD MUFFASIL , DISTRICT- AURANGABAD. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE SECRETARY AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT , GOVT. OF BIHAR , PATNA 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTATE CUM COLLECTOR GAYA 6. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR GAYA with CWJC No.753 of 2009 1. BIRENDRA PRASAD S/O LATE LATE VISHWANATH PRASAD R/O MOHALLA - MUTAN NAGAR, NEW COLONY, P.S- CIVIL LINES, DISTRICT- GAYA 2. JITENDAR KUMAR S/O BALESHWAR PRASAD R/O VILLAGE - KUTLUPUR , P.S- KHIZARSARAI, DISTRICT- GAYA 3. MUSTAQUE AHMED S/O SHEIKH ASIMUDDIN R/O VILLAGE -- HETAMPUR , P.S- AURANGABAD MUFFASIL , DISTRICT- AURANGABAD. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE SECRETARY PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 4. THE SECRETARY AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT , GOVT. OF BIHAR , PATNA 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTATE CUM COLLECTOR GAYA 6. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CUM ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR GAYA ----------- 02. 30.09.2010 The petitioners in the two writ applications are common. C.W.J.C. No. 753 of 2009 has been 2 filed for regularization which has been rejected by the three men committee. C.W.J.C. No. 4117 of 2010 questions the fresh advertisement for appointment on contract basis. The petitioners claim to have been appointed as Amin on daily wages in or about 1992. It is their case that they have continued to work uninterruptedly and fulfill the qualifications for appointment as provided in the fresh advertisement dated 23.1.2010 also. Daily wagers merit no claim for regularization stands explained in Secretary State of Karnataka Versus Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1 and State of Karnataka & Others Versus Ganpati Chaya Nayak & Others (2010) 3 SCC 115. However, this Court thus finds substance in the submission of the petitioners that they have been working for long years as Amin in the Gaya District. If they possess the conditions of eligibility provided in the advertisement dated 23.1.2010 undoubtedly, they have long years of work experience, knowledge of topography of the lands and other local conditions etc. That is an assets which this Court expects the respondents State to consider and utilize rationally rather than to act rigidly equating the petitioners with fresh appointees. 3 The petitioners are stated to have applied also in response to the advertisement dated 23.1.2010. This Court is of the firm opinion that it may be in the interest of the respondents themselves as a matter of policy to consider issues of preference for the past work experience, necessary age relaxation so that the experience on the job, qualification and expertise which are petitioners may have acquired is utilized by the State in a manner to benefit its own interest. This Court expects the respondents State to decide such issues of preference and age relaxation before initiating the process of selections. In A.I.R. 2001 Sc 706 (Gujarat Agricultural University Versus Rathod Labhu Bechar & Others) the Court at paragraph 27 and 28 has held as follows:- “27. In Bhagwati Prasad v. Delhi State Mineral Development Corporation, 1990 (1) SCC 361 : (AIR 1990 SC 371 : 1990 Lab IC 126), this Court observed (para 6 of AIR and Lab IC) : "The main controversy centres round the question whether some petitioners are possessed of the requisite qualifications to hold the posts so as to entitle them to be confirmed in the respective posts held by them: The indisputable facts are that the petitioners were appointed between the period 1983 and 1986 ever since, they have been working and have gained sufficient experience in the actual discharge of duties attached to the posts held by them. Practical experience would 4 always aid the person to effectively discharge the duties and it is sure guide to assess the suitability. The initial minimum educational qualification prescribed for the different posts is undoubtedly a factor to be reckoned with, but it is so at the time of the initial entry into the service. Once the appointments were made as daily rated workers and they were allowed to work for a considerable length of time, it would be hard and harsh to deny them the confirmation in the respective posts on the ground that they lack the prescribed educational qualifications." 28. Thus in view of their long experience on the fact of this case and for the concerned posts the prescribed qualification, if any, should not come in the way of their regularisation. Clause 1(b) provides for the regularisation of daily wagers in a phased manner to the extent of available sanctioned post.” If the petitioners have worked for any period as daily wagers, they are naturally entitled to be paid their dues in accordance with law. Let such dues be paid to the petitioners within a maximum period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. C.W.J.C. No. 753 of 2009 is dismissed except to the extent and the directions for payment of arrears of daily wages. C.W.J.C. No. 4117 of 2007 is partly allowed with observations. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)