B"" • ,TTIS< it Pstition IS) No. 1576 of 2002 Petitioners 1) 2) 7i 8) Chatram Patle, S/o. Lauki Patle, aged about 5S years, working as Permanent Gangman, PubHo Works DepartmenS, Sub-D'vision Janjgir, DisSrict Janjgir-Champa (CG), fADpQintmsnt on 3-11.1956) Nathuram Yadav, S/o!/Bhakiu Yadav, aged about 49 years, working as Permanent Gangman, Publio Works Department, Sub-DMsion Janjgir, DistriCt Janjgir-Champa (CG). 'ADDointment in the vear 1 °70'! Dev Singi-i Kahsvap, S.'o. Kaleshv/ar Prassd, aged about 47 veare, working as PeTnanent Publlc Wofr^ Ospsrtmsr^. Sub- r'.c-'i D'vision Janjgir, Distrid: Janjgir-Champa ( (Appointment on 22-12-1 S81 ) 4') Bahork Kashyap, S/o. Chakhia, aged about 50 Ve8rS. WQf|<|nQ ^^ pgrm^Hgnt QsnQrmgn^ Pu.b'io Wgrte Department, Sub Diviston Janjgir, Distriot Janjgir-Champa (03). (Appo'Rtmsnt on 22-12-1981 ) 5) Saupatram Satnami, S/o. Amol Singh, aged about 54 years, working as Permanent QsngrT'iSH; Publlc Worte D®psrLrFiSHt, Sub- Division Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). (Appointment in the year 1978) Arjun Kanwar, S/o. Baratu Kanswar, aged about 58 yeare, working as Permanent Gangman, Pub'io Works Department, Sub-Division Janjglr, District Janjgir-Cnampa (CG). (Appointment on "!,12.1981) Purrj Ram, S/o. Dauram, aged about 49 years, working as Penrianent Gangman, Pubiic Works Department, Sub Division Janjgir, Distrlct Janigir- Champa (CG). (Appointment in the year 1978). Bedram, S/o. Ratiram, aged about 56 years, working as permanent Gangman, Public Worte "i—.^—^.^~~s-i+ a; it- ";;'..'?"?;-" i""^;.-';*- r^?c-4—i.~- i"—:,-~;! uspsnmsni; SiUc-uiViSEcn jsnjgir; uisEncs -jsnjQir- Champa (CG). (Appointment in fche year 1 981) Ashv.ani Kumar Gond, S/o. b'laiech, ased about 46 v/esrs, WQfklno ss n8rrrt3nent Qsnomgn. Public Works Department, Sub-DMslon Janjyir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). (Appointment in the year 1SS1) ^sSE@%^^ //s^*^':%. ^. 2 10) Kunwar Singh Gond, S/o. Sumeil Gond, aged sbout 5S yegsrs, worklpp ss os'Tnsn^nt Gangman, Public Worte Department, Sub- Division Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). (Appojntment on 22-12-1982). 11) Manharan Lal Sahu, S/o. Jhuru La!, aged about 61 years, workir.g as pennanent Gangman, Pubfc Worte Department, Sub Divislon Janjgir, Distriot Janjgir Champa (CG). (Appointment on 12-12-1881). •vf 12) Bhojram Patei, S/o. Jagganathi, aged about 54 yeare, working as permanent Gangman, Pubtic 'vVorks Department; Sub Division Janjgir, District Janjyif Champa (CG). (Appointment on 13-11 -1981 ) 13) Resham Bal widow of Poiiceram, aged about 61 years, worRing as permanent Gangman; Pubtic Wopks Department, Sub Division Janjyir, DisSriot Janjgir Champa (CQ). (Appolntment on 22-12-1981 ) 'li4) Manharan Lai Sahu, Sto. Shivdayal Sahu, aged about 5Q y93.rs wort<tng as psrmsnsnt Gssngman; Publio Wo''ks Department, Sub-Drvlsion Janigir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). (ADTO'ntment on 24-4-1974) 15) Kamai Bai, wife of Manharan Sahu, aged about 51 vesrs. workino ^s Dpmianent Qannm3n. Pubiic Works DepartmenS, Sub-Diviston Janjglr, District Janjgir-Champa (CG; (Appoirtment on 3.11.1981) Rsspondents ) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretar);, DeDartment of Public Works, D.K.S. Bhawan, The. Sub-divisiona! officer, Pub'iio Vv'orks Department, Sub-Diysion Janjgir, District Janjg'r- Champa (CG). fWrit Petition under Article 228/227 of the Constitution of tndia') Shri F.S. Khare, counsel for the petltioners. Shri Satish G'upts, Govt. Advocate forthe State. f'^'-B» • {? %'S?'gB'», g \- ^ J' S •••f'•' ''•V ^.ss^ ^ ^ (Passsd on 13^-^08) With consent or iearned counsel appearing for both the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing finaily. •^) .earned oounsel appearing for the petiSioners submits that the pstitioners were aDpo'.nted as permanent Gangmen. The petitioners are entitled to the benefits flowing from the ludgment and order passed In ©ovind81 others Vs. Stata of C.Q. & otliers (2007 (2) CGU 29). The petitloners are bsing denied the benefits. 'SA Learned counsel appearing for t'ne respondents/State submits that the petnionere cannot claim any other benefits like reguiarizatton. However, the petit'roners, if stand on the same footing, are entitlaj to the benefits, in accordancs •with judgment and order datec! 4-1-2007 passed in Govind & others (supra). 4) Accordingiy, this writ petition is aliowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Govind & others (supra), subject to versfication of the fact asto whether the petitioners have acquired the status of permanent gangmen. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge riaiu