IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1317 of 2000 MOHAMMAD MOINUDDIN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 6. 14.08.2008 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. The claim in this writ application is one for regularisation by appointment on a permanent Class IV post of Chaukidar on which the petitioner has been working on daily wages, by now stated to be 26 years from 1.5.1982. It is interesting to note that the counter affidavit questions the appointment of the petitioner on daily wages as contrary to law. He did not appoint himself, someone in the Government appointed him. That someone has no relevance for the respondents in their counter affidavit. The person who made the appointment is equally responsible for having made such illegal appointment and the Government is required to appropriately proceed against him also which this Court so directs both with regard to departmental and criminal prosecution. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, in view of the settled law that daily wager holds no post and cannot claim regularisation as regularization is no mode for appointment, this Court finds it difficult to grant any positive relief to the petitioner. The petitioner claims to be continuing in service till date. In view of the exception made in the case of Secretary, State Karnataka Vrs Uma Devi (3), (2006) 4 SCC 1, he may be considered as one time measure for regularization in accordance with law. If there be any dues of daily wage of the petitioner and he files a representation in that regard the authorities are required to examine the same and dispose it off in accordance with law on both counts within a period of two months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. The writ application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)