IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15591 of 2008 DDT CHHIRKAW(MAUSAMI)KARMCHARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS with CWJC No.11001 of 2007 AJAY KUMAR & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS with CWJC No.15235 of 2008 KAILASH BIHARI THAKUR & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS with CWJC No.16637 of 2008 PRAMOD KUMAR MANDAL & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS For the petitioner--- Mr. Umakant Shukla Mr Sushil Kumar Mr. Rajesh Ranjan For the State ------ Mr. P.K.Verma, AAG 4 Mr. A.K.Pandey GA-9 2. 22.04.2011 The petitioners in all these three writ application are of various Districts of Bhagalpur, Sheikhpura and East Champaran. They claimed to be persons who are seasonally employed by the State for spraying D.D.T in anti malaria drive. They are neither permanent nor daily wage employees of the State Government, their services were taken up only for a short period of fort night or so for the purpose aforesaid. Their grievance is that they are not being empanelled for consideration of appointment to Class IV posts contrary to the State Government decision of the year 1991. The decision of the State Government is to empanel the seasonal D.D.T workers for their future absorption in Government service in some case. The Districts Magistrate have 2 rejected the list sent for empanelment by Civil Surgeon –cum- Chief Medical Officer, on the ground that the person seeking empanelment had not continuously worked for more than 240 days. They are not being empanelment because apparently they did not apply in time for empanelment. In my view, this Court has on number of occasions, considered these matters and it has been clearly pointed out that the stipulation of 240 days is a stipulation for the purposes of regularization of persons working and for the purposes of giving recommendations/ preferences in matter of employment. This Court has already noticed this situation in C.W.J.C No. 12400 of 2003 Sushil Prasad and others Vs. State of Bihar and others disposed of on 8.4.2011. It has been held that the decision of the State Government directing empanelment of seasonal D.D.T workers is not subject to the condition that they must have worked for 240 days because by nature of their duty itself, it is not possible. More over it may be pointed out the question here is of empanelment for later being given jobs. The empanelment only entitled to being considered in order of their seniority and does not ensure an employment. In that view of the matter, I have no option but to direct the respective District Magistrate – cum- Collector of the Districts to accept the lists of candidates for empanelment as being recommended by the first Medical Officer- cum- Civil Surgeon of the respective Districts. It may be mentioned that D.D.T spray is seasonal and is continuing all persons who were prepared in 1991 are required to be 3 empanelled upon recommendation being made and the District Magistrate –cum- Collector cannot refuse empanelment. With the aforesaid observations and directions and in the hope that the District Magistrate concerned would immediately takes steps for empanelment of the petitioners were duly recommended by the Civil Surgeon aforesaid within a period of three months from the date of production of copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of. Namita ( Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)