-1- NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6984 of 2018 Devendra Dewangan S/o Bhuvan Lal Dewangan Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Thana Road Bilaigarh, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Joint Secretary Urban Administration And Development, Indravati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Nagar Panchayat Bilaigarh Through Chief Muncipal officer, Bilaigarh, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 4 - Mukesh Kumar Navrang S/o Late Firatram Navrang Ward No. 15, Bhatgaon, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. Prateek Tiwari, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Manharan Lal Sahu, Advocate Respondent No.4 : Mr. Amiyakant Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05.05.2025 -2- 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased set aside the impugned order dated 21.08.2018 ( EXURE P/1), in the interest of justice. ΑΝΝ 10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for regularization for their services of the respondent Nagar Panchayat against sanctioned and vacant post in view of decision taken in meeting dated 13.09.2018, in the interest of justice. 10.3. That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2) Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is pressing only relief clause 10.2 of the petition regarding regularization of his services with Nagar Panchayat, Bilaigarh. He contends that the petitioner was appointed vide order dated 21.01.2009 against a sanctioned and vacant post as a daily rated employee. He would argue that a resolution was passed by the President-in-Council on 13.09.2018 recommending regularization of the services of the petitioner along with other similarly situated daily rated employees. He submits that a direction may be issued to respondents No. 2 and 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization in light of the said resolution. 3) Mr. Vivek Agrawal further submits that a perusal of the return filed by respondents No. 2 and 3 clearly shows that respondent No. 4 has already been appointed at Lawan Nagar Panchayat. -3- 4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. 5) Mr. Sahu, counsel for the respondent No. 3 contends that the petitioner is merely a daily rated employee and, therefore, has no vested right to seek regularization. 6) Mr. Prateek Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer for the State, and Mr. Amiyakant Tiwari, counsel appearing for respondent No. 4, support the submissions made by Mr. Sahu. 7) Heard. 8) Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has worked as a daily rated employee on the post of Computer Operator and a resolution was passed on 13.09.2018 by the President-in-Council regarding regularization of the services of the petitioner and other similarly situated employees, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to take appropriate steps pursuant to the resolution dated 13.09.2018. 9) The respondents are directed to take a decision preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10) With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), this writ petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim