Rajendra Kumar Bareth v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 5197 of 2021

1. Rajendra Kumar Bareth S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Bareth Aged About 27 Years Occupation, Safai Karmi/ House Keeping Staff R/o Village Kasha Thana Dabhra Tahsil Dabhra District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

2. Divya Maheshwari W/o Shri Dwarika Prasad Maheshwari Aged About 32 Years Occupation Safai Karmi/ House Keeping Staff R/o Village Toondri Thana Dabhra, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sanchalak, Sanchalnalay Swasthya Sewaye Raipur, Mantralaya Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh,

2. Vitt Niyantrak, Sanchalnalay Swasthya Sewaye Raipur, Mantralay Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh,

3. Mukhya Chikitsha Avm Swasthya Adhikari District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh,

4. Khand Chikitsha Adhikari Samudayik Swasthya Kendra Dabhra District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Kunal Das., P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 24.09.2021

1. The limited grievance that the petitioners have in the instant case is the action on the part of the petitioners in discontinuing the services of petitioners.

2. According to the counsel for petitioners, they were all working as daily wage employee under the respondents and suddenly, the services of the petitioners were discontinued.

3. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, counsel for the petitioners submits that he has instruction to state that there is availability of work in the department and they are also in need of daily wage employees, however, ignoring the claim of petitioners for said work they are appointing third persons against the said post.

4. The only prayer that the petitioners make at this juncture is that, if at all, if the respondents intend to engage daily wage workers, let the petitioners be given some preferential right and to be continued instead of appointing fresh personnel. The respondents be directed to take work from the petitioners considering their experience and the length of service rendered by them.

5. Given the said grievance that the petitioners have, the writ petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the respondents 2 to 4 to look into the grievance of petitioners and try to redress the same as far as possible by reengaging the petitioners, if at all if the State or the respondents intend to get work from the daily wage workers. Under such circumstances, the petitioners be given due weightage for the services that they have already rendered in the past.

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

1. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge J/-