1 2025:CGHC:19822 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3025 of 2025 1 - Dr. Shashikant Sahu S/o Shri Shatrughan Lal Sahu Aged About 42 Years Working As Post Of Ayush Health Officer (Contract Basis) At Primary Health Center Shekharpur Tah. Pathalgaon District - Jashpur (C.G.) 2 - Dr. Ravishankar Kumar S/o Shri Kripa Prasad Singh Aged About 42 Years Working As Post Of Ayush Health Officer (Contract Basis) At Govt. Ayurved Dispensary Ankira Tah. Farsabahar District - Jashpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Health And Family Welfare Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - District Ayurved Officer Jashpur District- Jashpur (C.G.) Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyan, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 01/05/2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.05.02 18:07:19 +0530 2 petitioners on the post of Ayush Health OfÏcer, pursuant to the circular dated 05.03.2008 from the date when the similarly situated persons have been regularized. 2. Case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the petitioners are working on the post of Ayush Health OfÏcer in department of respondent on contractual basis and have completed more than seventeen years. The petitioners are having all the requisite qualifications for holding the said post. The petitioners had submitted their detailed representation to the respondent authorities for considering their case for regular appointment as they had already completed more than seventeen years. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the action on the part of the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory in nature and also violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are working the said post 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 petitioners are also entitled for regularization of their services on the said post. 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. 1 WPS No. 4293 of 2012 (decided on 10/02/2023 3 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." 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 petitioners are 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 Amardeep 2 Civil Appeal Nos. 7423-7429 of 2018 (decided on 01/08/2018)