High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/388/2019disposed off

Sabu Verghese v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-01-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 388 of 2019 Sabu Verghese S/o Shri M.G. Varghese Aged About 53 Years Presently Working As Sub Divisional Officer (Sub Engineer) In The Office Of Sub Division Bastar Under The Executive Engineer, P.W.D. North Bastar, Division No. 2, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar Chhattisgarh., R/o Ews - 74/75 Bodhghat Housing Board Colony, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

4. Executive Engineer P.W.D. North Bastar Division No.2, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate For State :

Mr. Saleem Kazi, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 21/01/2019

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Sub Engineer on ad hoc daily wage basis on 23.01.1987 against the vacant post. The services of the petitioner were continued with artificial break of two or three days in service and worked continuously till the date of his regularization. The petitioner was given the benefits of annual increments.

2. The similarly situated employees have approached the State Administrative Tribunal (for short ("SAT") in Original Application No. 1979/91 (Satish Kumar Mandloi Vs. State of M.P. And another) praying for similar relief as sought for in this petition. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this case may also be disposed off in the same terms and conditions.

3. Learned counsel for the State in the light of the order of the SAT as aforestated, submits that after verifying the facts of the case, petitioner's case shall be considered.

4. In view of the foregoing and categorical statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the State, this petition is allowed in the same terms i.e. if the Committee finds the petitioner suitable for the post in all respect, he shall be regularized on the post held by him and shall also pay him salary on regular scale. He shall be entitled to salary for the dates on break in service. His seniority shall be counted from the date of his initial appointment.

5. No costs.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit