1 2025:CGHC:17008 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2272 of 2025 1 Abdul Rahim Khan S/o Shri Abdul Salim Khan Aged About 32 Years Working As Driver, R/o House No. 366, Ward No. 8, Near Mission School, Rajendra Nagar, Bahtarai, Bilaspur Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 Engineer-In-Chief Department Of Public Works, Sirpur Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 Chief Engineer Department Of Public Works, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 Superintendent Engineer Department Of Public Works, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works (B/s), Division No. 2, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.04.16 10:32:10 +0530 2 6 Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department (B/r), Sub Division Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) :Shri Syed Isshadil Ali, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State :Shri S.S. Choubey, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 11.04.2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the petitioner on the post of Driver pursuant to the circular dated 05.03.2008 from the date when the similarly situated persons have been regularized. 2. Case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is presently working on the post of Driver in department of respondent as daily wager and has completed more than two decades of service. The petitioner is having all the requisite qualifications for holding the post of driver. The petitioner had submitted his detailed representation to the respondent authorities for considering his case for regular appointment on the post of Driver as he had already completed more than two decades of service. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action on the part of the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory in nature and also violative of the principles of 3 natural justice and Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner is a daily wager since long. He would further submit that the State government has regularized the services of similarly situated daily wage employees on the basis of circular dated 05/03/2008, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for regularization of his services on the post of Driver. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Manoj Kumar Nirmalkar v. State of Chhattisgarh1 4. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State would oppose the contention of the counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari and Others v. The State of Jharkhand and Others2 held in para 11 as under: "11. Under the circumstances, we are of the view that the Regularization Rules must be given a pragmatic interpretation and the appellants, if they have completed 10 years of service on the date of promulgation of the Regularization Rules, ought to be given the benefit of the service rendered by them. If they have completed 10 years of service they should be regularized unless there is some valid objection to their regularization like misconduct etc." 1 WPS No. 4293 of 2012 (decided on 10/02/2023 2 Civil Appeal Nos. 7423-7429 of 2018 (decided on 01/08/2018) 4 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petition is allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to inspect the records of others similarly situated employees when their services were regularized. If the case of the petitioner is also found to be similar to those daily wagers whose services were regularized, his services be also regularized from the same date. It is also directed that all this exercise be completed within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Jyoti