2025:CGHC:29242 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6051 of 2025 1 - Kanhaiya Lal Yadav S/o. Shri Beeselal Yadav, Aged About 38 Years Data Entry Operator, Chief Engineer Pwd Office, Nava Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Jitendra Kumar Mahadeva S/o. Kirtan Lal Aged About 45 Years Data Entry Operator, Chief Engineer Pwd Office, Nava Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Bharat Soni S/o. Shashi Soni Aged About 35 Years Data Entry Operator, Chief Engineer Pwd Office, Nava Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Gitesh Kumar Sahu Pyare Lal Sahu Aged About 31 Years Worker, Chief Engineer Pwd Office, Nava Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Shatruhan Lal Tarak Dhanaji Ram Tarak Aged About 38 Years Worker, Chief Engineer Pwd Office, Nava Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur- Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer-In-Chief, Public Works Department, North Block, Sector 19, Nirman Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Raipur Zone, District-Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer, Public Works, Department, Division No. 3, Nava Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Circle No. 1, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) ...Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioners : Shri Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Vinay Pandey, Dy AG ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 30.06.2025 Wps 6051 of 2025 2 1. By the present petition, petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the petitioners 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 petitioners are presently working on the post of skilled and unskilled workers in department of respondent as Daily Wage employees, and have completed more than 10 years of service. Petitioners are having all the requisite qualifications for holding the post of skilled and unskilled workers. Petitioners had submitted their detailed representation to the respondent authorities for considering their case for regular appointment on the post of skilled and unskilled workers, as they had already completed more than 10 years of service. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit 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. Petitioners are Daily Wage employees since long. He would further submit that the State Government has regularized the services of similarly situated employees on the basis of Circular dated 05.03.2008, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for regularization of their services on the respective posts. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Manoj Kumar Nirmalkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh (WPS-4293 of 2012) decided on 10.02.2023. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State would oppose the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the material available on record. Wps 6051 of 2025 3 6. Hon’ble Apex court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari, and others Vs the State of Jharkhand, and others Civil Appeal Nos.7423-7429 of 2018, decided on 01.08.2018, held in para 11 of its judgment: “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. After verification of the records of the petitioners, if it is found that the case of the petitioners is similar to those daily wager employees, whose services were regularized, and their service records permit them to be regularized, present petitioners be also granted same benefit. 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 padma