Arjun Ram Chouhan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4193 of 2021 Arjun Ram Chouhan S/o Late Shri Budhan Ram, Aged About 52 Years Working As Daily Wager Employee (Watchman) And Posted At Govt. High School Devgarh, Block Sitapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh, R/o Sontarai, Post Devgarh, P. S. And Tahsil Sitapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. Collector (Tribal Development) Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh

3. Block Education Officer, Sitapur, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh

4. Principal, Govt. High School Devgarh, Block Sitapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav , Advocate For State :

Ms. Abhyunati Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 12.08.2021

1. The claim of petitioner in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider and decide his application for regularization in service under the respondents.

2. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as a daily wage employee on 22.10.2007 and since then he has been continuously

and uninterruptedly working under the respondents. According to the petitioner, his services are satisfactory and he has been working against a sanctioned vacant post. Therefore, the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to consider his application for regularization at the earliest as only a few more years are left for reaching to the age of superannuation.

3. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents to consider and decide the claim of petitioner on its own merits so far as regularization in service is concerned at the earliest preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. The petitioner, in addition to any previous representation, would also be entitled to approach the respondents by way of a detailed fresh representation in this regard. The respondents while deciding the claim of petitioner would also consider the recommendation made in favour of petitioner by the Assistant Commissioner.

5. With the aforesaid observation the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai