1 2025:CGHC:21625 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3480 of 2025 1 - Smt. Anisun Begam W/o Jehrul Ansari Aged About 47 Years Working As Assistant Grade-Iii/ Lower Division Clerk In The Office Of Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub Division No. 2, Ambikapur, Division Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan, Sector-19, North Block, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Surguja Zone, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 4 - Superintending Engineer Public Works Department, Ambikapur Circle, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 5 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 6 - Sub Divisional Officer Public Works Department, Sub Division No. 2, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. CJK. Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, PL RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.05.09 18:32:47 +0530 2 (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 09/05/2025 1. By the present petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the petitioner 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 Assistant Grade-III in department of respondent as daily wager and has completed more than one decade and four years. The petitioner is having all the requisite qualifications for holding the said post. The information of the petitioner has also ben forwarded to the office of Executive Engineer, PWD, but till date the services of the petitioner has not been regularized. 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 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 entitle for regularization of his services. 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 1 WPS No. 4293 of 2012 (decided on 10/02/2023 3 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." 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. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Rahul 2 Civil Appeal Nos. 7423-7429 of 2018 (decided on 01/08/2018)