Singis B \ IN THE HIGH COURT_QF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.NO. ^&S) / 2004 Petitioner -<^ 5P/^^ ^w/ \,/y^" ^"/^ <^/r Khokhan Biswas ^ S./o Upendra Biswas, Aged about 46 years, working as Pump Onerator, Municipal Council Kondaeaon, Dist : Bastar-fC.G.) >®' Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretarv Department of Urban Administration & Development, Mantralaya, Raipur-fC.G.) The Dy.Director Urban Administration and Developinent, Raipur, Dist: Raipur-(C.G.j ^.'!ix<stL.-.^J ^?^€/ 'i't:.^._~^...': 3. The Municipal Council Kondagoan Through Chief Municipal Officer, Kondaaaon, Dist : Bastar-(C.G.) 4. The President Municipal Council, Kondagaon, Dist: Bastar-fC.G.) -WRIT PETITION U/A 226 / 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. Particulars_of the Petitioner. As per cause tftle. . 2. Particulars of the Resuondents. As uer cause title. ."V- ^s HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Blmde Bench: HonTale Mr. Justice Satish K. Afplhntri W.P. No. 4084 of 2004 Petitioner Kamlu Ram Gawrc Vcrsus Respondents : State of Chliattisgarh & othcrs Petitioner W.P. No. 4085 of 2004 Sameer Saha Versus Rcspondents : State of CUhattisgarh & ofhers W.P. No. 4086 of2004 Pfetitioncr Smt. Sakuntala Mishra Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh & others W.P. No. 4087 of2004 Petitioner : Maaoj Jaiswal Versus Respondents : State of Chhatdsgarh & others Petitioner W.P. No. 4088 of2004 SUv Shankar Sori Versus Respondents : StateofChhattisgarh&othera W.P. No. 4089 of 2004 Petitioner Dincsh Sahu Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh & others 6 Petitioner W.P, Np, 4090 of 2004 Sushaat Dutta Versus Respondents : Stete of Chhattisgarh & others Petitioncr W.P. No. 4091 of2004 Khokhan Biswas Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh & others Ptetitioner W.P. No. 4092 of 2004 Santosh Sahu Vcrsus Respondcnts : State of CUhattisgarh & others W.P. No. 4093 of2004 Petitioner : Bnjurani Sonber Versus Rcspondcnts State ofCUhattisyirh & others W.P. Np, 4094 of 2004 Petitioner : Ashok Shukla Versus Rcspondents Statc ofChhatfegarh & others W.P. No. 4095 of2004 Pctitioner Respondeuts Vcrsus Hualal Nctain State of Chliattisgarh & othcrs (81 ^Ft Preaent: Shri F>rafull Bharat, counsel for the petitioners. Shri. Arvind Dubey, Panel lawyer for the State. ORAL ORDER [1st August, 2006) Thc prescnt writ petitions, being Writ Petitions No. 4084/2004, 4085/2004, 4086/2004, 4087/2004, 4088/2004, 4089/2004, 4090/2004, 4091/3004, 4092/2004, 4093/2004, 4094/2004 and 4095/2004 iiwolve conunon question of law as to rcgularization of the senrices of the petitioaers. Thus, thesc petitfons arc being disposed ofby this conunon order. The petitioners are daily wagers appoiated ou 10.9.1991, 1.6.1986, 1.9.1986, 16.7.1984, 11.11.1993, 1992, 10.5.1990, 4.7.1986, 1990, 31.3.1990, 1.9.1983 and 16.7.1984 on various posts by Municipal Council, Kondagaon. The petitioncrs in att fhe pctitions scck regularization of their semces and further atteraatwcly grant ofregular pay-scale. The Honlak Supremc Court in fhe matter ofSecretarT. State of Karnataka and others Vs. Umadevi (31 and otherB reported in (20061 4 SCC 1 has clearly held that absorption, regularization, or pcrmancnt continuance of teinporaiy, contractual, casual, adaify-wagc or ad hoc cmployees appointed/rccruited and continucd for long in public emptoyinent dchors the constitutmnal sclicnic of pubUc employinent create anothcr mode of public employnient which is not pennissiblc. In fhe present casc thc pctitioners are dafly wageis and -are not appointed ia accordaace with law aad as per fhe coastituttonal scheine of fhc pubUc eiuployiaent. Thus they do no acquire ahy ,».'» right for regularization or for graat of regular pay-scalc. Furfher the Hon'bfc Supreinc Court in fhe inatter of Secrctaiy, State of Karaataka Vs. Uinadevi and ofhcrs (supra) ia paragraph-53 directed as under:- Para 53. The question of regularizatiDn ofihe scmccs of such einployccs may have to bc considered on m.eri.ts in thc light of fhe principlcs setfled by this Court in the cases aboverefcrred to and ia thc Ugbt of fhis judgment In that context, the Union of India, the State Govemmcnts and their instrumentalities shouM take steps to regularizc as a one-timc ineasiire, fhe scrvices of such iiTcgularIy appointed, who have worked for ten ycars or vwie ia dufy sanctioned posts but not under covcr of orders of thc courts or of tribuaals and shouU ftuthcr ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fiU those vacant sanctroned posts that require to be fitted up, ia cases where temporaiy einpkiyees or dafly w^ers are bciag now eniptoyed. The process inust be set in inotion within six monfhs -from this date. Wc also clarify that rcgularizatron, if auy atready made, but not sub judicc, need not be reopencd based on fhis judgmcnt, but there should be no further bypassing of the constitutional requireinents and rcgularizing or making pcrmanent, fhosc not dufy appointed as pcr the constitutional schcinc. In view of the above stated directions of thc Hon'ble Supremc Court, fhc rcspondcnts are diTected to compfy with ihe oider of the Supremc Coitrt as one-timc ineasure in thc cases of the petitionere. AB thesc petitions are accordingty disposed af. No order as to costs. A copy of this order bc placed in the record of all the connected writ petitions. Certified copy as per rules. j^':1. Sd/-,'^,^,., SatishK.AgniHotri r- Judge '? •n,