Edward Kispotta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6100 of 2017 • Edward Kispotta S/o Late Pitrus Kispotta Aged About 44 Years Working As Driver, Office Of Government Veterinary Science, Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Veterinary Service, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. The Director, Veterinary Services, Indravati Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. The Deputy Director, Veterinary Services, Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri Harish Khuntiya, Advocate.

For Respondents/State Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 16/11/2017

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working on daily wages in the Department of Veterinay from 1997 and yet his services have not been regularized. He would submit that pursuant to the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the matter of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Vs. Umadevi (3) & others reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, the State Government has framed a scheme for regularization by issuing a circular dated 5th March, 2008. However, in spite of the said circular and even after expiry of about 3 years period, the case of the petitioner for regularization has not been considered. Learned

counsel would submit that for the present, the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider his case for regularization in the light of the State Government's circular dated 5th March, 2008.

2. Considering the limited prayer made in this petition and for the fact that the petitioner is working since July, 1997 and the State Government has already issued a circular on 5th March, 2008 for regularization of such daily wagers who have been appointed as daily wages in between 01.01.1989 to 31.12.1997, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby disposed of with a direction that in the event, petitioner prefers a representation before the competent authority within a period of 4 weeks from today, the authority shall consider petitioner's case in the light of circular dated 5th March, 2008 and pass a reasoned order on his representation at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of submission of representation.

3. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Akhilesh