2025:JHHC:22250 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI WP(S) No.3159 of 2025 ----- Gyan Mohan Sinha, s/o late Brahamdeo Narayan Prasad, R/o near Qtr. No. 12, New Colony, Tungri, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand … Petitioner(s). Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand through Chief Secretary of Jharkhand, Project Building, PO Dhurwa, PS Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi 2.The Principal Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasha, Jharkhand, Project Building, PO Dhurwa, PS Jagarnathpur, District Ranchi 3.The Commissioner, Singhbhum (Kolhan Division) PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum 4.The Deputy Commissioner, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum 5.The Deputy Collector (Establishment), office at Deputy Commissioner, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singbhum 6.The Officer In-Charge, District Record Room, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum … Respondents. CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Manish Mishra, GP-V …...... 03 /07.08.2025: Heard learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. In this case the petitioner prays for regularization. 3. Admittedly the petitioner was a daily wage employee. His appointment was made on 01.11.1994 by the letter issued by the Additional Deputy Collector, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 4. As per the petitioner, the petitioner had attained 60 years of age in the year 2017 but work was taken from him till 30.09.2020. Now in the year 2025, he files this writ petition praying for regularization. 5. This admitted facts clearly leads to the conclusion that the employer employee relationship has come to an end and has been extinguished. Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Oshiar Prasad vs. Sudamdih Coal Washery” reported in (2015) 4 SCC 71 at paragraph no. 25 has held as follows: “25. It is a settled principle of law that absorption and regularisation in service can be claimed or/and granted only when the contract of employment subsists and is in force inter se employee and the employer. Once it comes to an end either by efflux of time or as per the terms of the contract of employment or by its termination by the employer, then in such event, the relationship of employee and employer comes to an end and no 2025:JHHC:22250 2 longer subsists except for the limited purpose to examine the legality and correctness of its termination.” 6. Since the petitioner was appointed on daily wages and he has attained the age of superannuation in the year 2017 and since 30.09.2020 no work was being taken from him and admittedly now there is no employer employee relationship, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. He is not entitled for any relief after attaining the age of superannuation. 7. This writ petition is dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/