1 2025:CGHC:33099 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7091 of 2025 1 - Smita Nayak D/o Shri Ratnu Nayak Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Post Of Primary Accountant Cum Data Assistant (Contract Basis) At Govt. Primary Health Center Gholeng, Tah.- Jashpur, District- Jashpur (C.G.) 2 - Smt. Emla Kindo W/o Shri Jon Tirkey Aged About 43 Years Presently Working As Post Of Primary Accountant Cum Data Assistant (Contract Basis) At Govt. Primary Health Center Kukargaon, Tah.- Pathalgaon, District- Jashpur (C.G.) 3 - Sarita Toppo W/o Shri Agapit Tirkey Aged About 48 Years Presently Working As Post Of Data Entry Operator (Contract Basis) At Govt. Community Health Center Kunkuri, Tah.- Kunkuri, District- Jashpur (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Lalita Bai W/o Shri Paulus Bara Aged About 37 Years Presently Working As Post Of Primary Accountant Cum Data Assistant (Contract Basis) At Govt. Primary Health Center Ludeg, Tah.- Pathalgaon, District- Jashpur (C.G.) 5 - Khushboo Mishra D/o Shri Chandresh Mishra Aged About 32 Years Presently Working As Post Of Primary Accountant Cum Data Assistant (Contract Basis) At Govt. Primary Health Center Kersai, Tah.- Farsabahar, District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mantralya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Joint Director Health Services Department, Division Ambikapur, District- Sarguja (C.G.) 3 - Chief Medical Officer Jashpur District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner (s) : Shri Manoj Chouhan, Advocate. For State : Shri Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 15.07. 202 5 1. By the present petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the petitioners on the post of Data Entry Operator 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 Data Entry Operator in the respondent Department on contract Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.07.16 11:43:41 +0530 2 basis and has completed more than a decade. The petitioners are having all the requisite qualifications for holding their respective posts. 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 a decade. 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 principles of natural justice and the Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are working on contract basis 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 post of Data Entry Operator. 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 No.4293 of 2012, decided on 10.02.2023). 4. Par 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 Vs. The State of Jharkhand and Others (Civil Appeal Nos. 7423-7429 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." 3 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this petition is allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to inspect the records of other similarly situated employees when their services were regularized. If the case of the petitioners are also found to be similar to those employees whose services were regularized, their 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/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder