Jagdish Ram Janghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1348 of 2020 Jagdish Ram Janghel, S/o. Late Shri Paltu Ram Janghel, Aged About 48 Years, R/o. Village Birutola, Tahsil And Police Station Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Engineer-In-Chief, Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. S.P. Kale & Mr. K.P.S.Gandhi, Advocates For State/Respondents :

Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 28.02.2020

1. The relief sought for by the Petitioner in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner for regularization.

2. According to the Petitioner, he has been working with the Respondents as a daily wage employee since 2004 onwards, as such he has put in about more than 15 years of service as a daily wage employee.

3. According to the Petitioner, in view of the circular dated 5.3.2008 and the subsequent circulars issued in respect of regularization, the

Respondents ought to have considered the claim of the Petitioner also for regularization, but till date the Petitioner's claim has not been finalized or considered by the department. The Petitioner further submits that there are also sanctioned vacant posts available with the department against which the Petitioner could have been regularized.

4. Given the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending, rather ends of justice would meet if the writ petition itself is disposed of with a direction to Respondents No. 2 & 3 to take a decision so far as the regularization of the Petitioner is concerned at the earliest and thereafter an appropriate order be passed in this regard.

5. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to Respondents No. 2 & 3 to consider and decide the claim of the Petitioner in the light of the circular of the State Government dated 5.3.2008.

6. Let an appropriate decision be taken by the Respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge ashok