1 2025:CGHC:24305 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4564 of 2025 1 - Rinkey Bai D/o Bijeshwar Ram Aged About 34 Years Working As Post Of Second A.N.M. (Contract Basis) At Govt. Sub Health Center Sogda, Tahsil Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Sudema Mahanandi W/o Shri Baleshwar Mahanandi Aged About 45 Years Working As Post Of Second A.N.M. (Contract Basis) At Govt. Sub Health Center Sarudih, Tahsil Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Smt. Nitu Sinha W/o Shri Mithlesh Sinha Aged About 44 Years Working As Post Of Second A.N.M. (Contract Basis) At Govt. Sub Health Center Patratoli, Tahsil Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Smt. Pramila Bai W/o Shri Rajendra Prasad Gupta Aged About 45 Years Working As Post Of Second A.N.M. (Contract Basis) At Govt. Sub Health Center Raikona, Tahsil Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Smt. Kavita Mishra W/o Shri Vinod Mishra Aged About 46 Years Working As Post Of Second A.N.M. (Contract Basis) At Govt. Sub Health Center Sitonga, Tahsil Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mantralya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Joint Director Health Services Department, Division Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Medical Officer Jashpur District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Chouhan, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.06.17 18:28:43 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 16/06/2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the petitioners on their respective post on which they are rendering their services on daily wages/contract basis since a long period 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 presently working on the post of Second A.N.M. in department of respondent as daily wager/contract basis and has completed more than 12 years. The petitioners are having all the requisite qualifications for holding the said post. The petitioners had submitted their detailed representations to the respondent authorities for considering his case for regular appointment as they had already completed more than 12 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 daily wagers 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 post of Second A.N.M. In support of 3 his contention, learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Manoj Kumar Nirmalkar v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No. 4293 of 2012 (decided on 10/02/2023). 4. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State would oppose the contention of the counsel for the petitioners. 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 Others (Civil Appeal Nos. 7423- 7429 of 2018 (decided on 01/08/2018)) 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/contract basis whose services were regularized, their services be 4 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/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved