Hori Lal Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 7613 of 2018 • Hori Lal Verma, S/o Late Deena Nath Verma, aged about 62 years, Occupation Service, R/o Village Gondpendri, Post Selud, Tahsil Patan, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Director, Urban Administration and Development, Directorate, Urban Administration & Development, Indrawati Bhawa, Capital Complex, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, Through: its Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocate For State :

Shri R.N. Pusty, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 26.11.2018 1.

Only relief which the petitioner has sought in this case is for a direction to respondent No.3 to consider his claim for regularization. 2.

According to the petitioner, he has been working with the respondents since 1985 as daily wage worker and later on since January 1997, he has been working on contingency basis. The contention of the petitioner is that he fulfill all the eligibility criteria which is otherwise required for regularization as per circular dated 05.03.2008. According to the petitioner, initially the

respondents on 13.10.2008 had ordered for regularization of about 92 persons of which around 28 persons did not accept the claim including the petitioner as they were being regularized on the post of Pump Attendant. The petitioner was continuously discharging the duty of an Assistant GradeIII. That out of these 28 persons also subsequently the respondent No.3 have regularized the services of as many as 12 persons and most of whom are junior to the petitioner and who have been regularized against the post of Time Keeper/Assistant Grade II. Yet the petitioner has for reasons best known have not been considered for regularization on the post of either Assistant Grade III or of Assistant Grade II and or as a Time Keeper. He thus makes a prayer that the respondent No.3 may be directed to consider the petitioner in parity with other similarly placed persons who have been absorbed as Time Keeper and all of whom are junior to the petitioner. 3.

Given the said facts, this Court is of the opinion that no purpose would be served to keep the writ petition pending, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 as also respondent No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization at par with the persons similarly placed subject to the petitioner fulfilling other requisite eligibility criteria. Let this exercise be completed within a period of 90 days from the receipt of certified copy of this order. 4.

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