High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4202/2020disposed off

Kanakram Khandekar, v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-10-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4202 of 2020 • Kanakram Khandekar, S/o Late Shree Vishal Das Khandekar, Aged About 45 Years Present Working As A Peon, In Aadivasi Balak Aashram, Mohali, Block - Kota, Police Station - Kota, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary Department Of Tribal Welfare, Mantralaya Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Police Station - Naya Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare And Development, Police Station - Naya Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Collector, (Tribal Welfare And Development), Police Station - Civil Lines, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

4. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare And Development, Police Station - Civil Lines, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Swarnakar, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Dy.A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 27-10-2020

1. Heard .

2. Considering the issue involved and the reply of the State, the case is taken up today for hearing.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is working as contingency employee for more than 10 years in different

State Government departments and despite the fact that he has rendered more than 10 years of service, his services are not being considered for regularization. Consequently, the prayer is made for regularization.

4. Perused the reply of the State.

5. Reply of the State would show that that the regularization case of the petitioner shall be considered individually in accordance with the prevailing circular dated 07.03.2012 and if he is found fit and fulfill the criteria laid down in the circular dated 07.03.2012, appropriate orders for regularization of his services may be passed.

6. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the State, at present no issue survives for consideration, as eventually it is the domain of the State to consider the cases individually.

7. Considering the period lapsed, it is directed that the State shall take a decision by examining the case of the petitioner within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

8. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Raju