High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/5445/2018disposed off

Gaukaran Singh v. State Of Chhattisgahr

2018-08-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5445 of 2018 Gaukaran Singh S/o Shri Jagannath Singh Aged About 52 Years Working As Carpenter At Hasdeo Barrage Water Management Sub Division Rampur (WRD), District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Chief Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Executive Engineer Hasdeo Barrage Water Management, Sub Division Rampur (WRD), District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.

4. Sub Divisional Officer Hasdeo Barrage Water Management, Sub Division Rampur (WRD), District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 23/08/2018 Heard.

1. Grievance of the petitioner, as ventilated through this petition is that even though the petitioner is continuing as daily wage employee since long, his claim for regularisation has not been decided till date. It is submitted that though the petitioner was terminated in the year 1995, award of reinstatement was passed in his favour by the Labour Court in the year 2014 with the legal consequence that the petitioner shall be deemed to be in service from the initial date of appointment in the year 1993.

2. If the case of the petitioner is considered treating his initial date of appointment as in the year 1993, he would be entitled to be considered for regularisation under circular dated 05/03/2008 issued

for consideration of cases of regularisation pursuant to direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi (3) and others, 2006 (4) SCC 1 for consideration of cases of those, who have completed 20 years of service.

3. After going through the records and orders passed by the Labour Court, it is quite clear that the effect of the order would be that the petitioner shall be deemed to be in service without any break. This would entitle the petitioner for due consideration for regularisation under circular dated 05/03/2008. It is ordered accordingly.

4. Let the case of the petitioner be considered by a duly constituted committee as per policy dated 05/03/2008 and a decision be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved