Mrs, Draupati Markam v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 7648 of 2018

1. Mrs. Draupati Markam W/o Rajesh Kumar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o P.O. Tilda Neora, Ward No. 4, Kewat Para, Near Rai Babu House, Thana Tilda, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Omprakash Nishad S/o Shri Ram Singh Nishad, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Vidhan Sabha Road, Saddu, Via Shanker Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur, Mahanadi Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 26.11.2018 The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners who are working as data entry operator on contractual basis under the respondents had participated in the recently issued advertisement dated 04.10.2018. The

only relief which the petitioners want is that while considering their claim, the respondent State may keep in mind the order of the State Govt. dated 17.01.2014 whereby it has been mentioned that the authority concerned should grant preference to the daily wage employee/contractual employee working in Class-III and Class-IV post against the direct recruitment which would be initiated in future.

2.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending rather ends of justice would meet if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to ensure that when the recruitment process is finalized, they shall also keep in mind the order of the State Govt. dated 17.01.2014 Annexure P-2. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the merits of the case as also the entitlement of the petitioners are concerned. 3.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Bhola