Dukhuram v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1412 of 2018 Dukhuram, S/o. Suklal, Aged about 57 years, R/o. Village Baghmara, Khairtarai, Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. At present posted at Kastgar Depo- Balod, Tahsil and District Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Chief Conservator of Forest, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Conservator of Forest, Durg Circle, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

4. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh

5. The Forest Range Officer, Forest Range, Forest Division Balod, District Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13/03/2018 Heard.

1. Grievance of the petitioner, as ventilated through this petition is that even though the petitioner is continuing as daily wage employee since long, his claim for regularisation has not been decided till date. It is submitted that though the petitioner was terminated in the year 1992, award of reinstatement was passed in his favour by the Labour Court in the year 2000 with the legal consequence that the petitioner shall be deemed to be in service from the initial date of appointment in the year 1982.

2. If the case of the petitioner is considered treating his initial date of appointment as in the year 1982, he would be entitled to be

considered for regularisation under circular dated 05/03/2008 issued for consideration of cases of regularisation pursuant to direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi (3) and others, 2006 (4) SCC 1 for consideration of cases of those, who have completed 20 years of service.

3. After going through the records and orders passed by the Labour Court, it is quite clear that the effect of the order would be that the petitioner shall be deemed to be in service without any break. This would entitle the petitioner for due consideration for regularisation under circular dated 05/03/2008. It is ordered accordingly.

4. Let the case of the petitioner be considered by a duly constituted committee as per policy dated 05/03/2008 and a decision be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved