Bhopendra Kumar Chandrakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (SERVICE) NO. 1779 OF 2021

1. Bhopendra Kumar Chandrakar, S/o Late Shri Luduram Chandrakar, aged about 38 years, R/o Village & P.O. Matwari, District Durg (CG)

2. Santosh Kumar Sonwani, S/o Late Shri Vijay Kumar Sonwani, aged about 37 years, R/o Village & P.O. Nikum, District Durg (CG)

3. Jayant Kumar, S/o Shri Ramdhin Patel, aged about 38 years, R/o Village & P.O. Saloni, Karmada, District Balodabazar (CG)

4. Jhawed (Jhawndra) Kumar Verma, S/o Shri Rishiram Verma, aged about 37 years, R/o Village & P.O. Borsi, District Balodabazar (CG) ... Petitioners versus 1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 2.

Director, Panchayat Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 3.

Commissioner, Mahatma Gandhi NAREGA, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (CG) ... Respondents For Petitioners :

Mrs. Meena Shastri, Advocate.

For Respondents :

Mr. Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/06/2021

1. The limited relief that Petitioners have sought for, is for an appropriate direction to Respondents to consider the case of Petitioners for being regularized in service.

2. Learned Counsel for Petitioners submits that Petitioners have all been working with the Respondents as contractual employees uninterruptedly for the last 1015 years and that the nature of work discharged by them was regular in nature, therefore, the Respondents should consider regularizing the services of Petitioners against the post that they are discharging. She further submits that the Respondents have already constituted a Committee to scrutinize the claim of Petitioners seeking regularization and that the Committee also is said

to have recommended the case of the Petitioners for regularization. However, there is no further development in their case for regularization.

3. The limited prayer sought for by Petitioners is not opposed by learned State Counsel.

4. Given the said facts, the present writ petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the Respondents to consider the grievance of Petitioners and pass an appropriate order in respect of the claim of Petitioners for being regularized in service, at the earliest, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. Petitioners are at liberty to file their detailed representation, if they so want, in addition to any representation that they have already made and the Respondents are directed to decide the same within the same period of 90 days.

6. Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE sharad