` CWP-7451-2016 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 206 CWP-7451-2016 Date of Decision: 19.08.2025 Kuldip Singh …Petitioner Versus U.T., Chandigarh and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. Brijesh Nandan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate for the respondents *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to the respondents to regularize him as Sweeper. 2. The petitioner joined respondent as Sweeper in 2007. He was engaged as part time worker. From time to time, the working hours were changed and accordingly remuneration was also changed. The remuneration was also enhanced keeping in mind change of Deputy Commissioner rate. The petitioner was not appointed against a sanctioned post. The respondent discontinued to avail petitioner’s service w.e.f. 01.04.2016. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner deserves to be regularized as per judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jaggo v. Union of India and others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826. MOHIT KUMAR 2025.08.19 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. ` CWP-7451-2016 -2- 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that petitioner was engaged sometimes for two hours and sometimes four hours. He was paid consolidated wages of ₹1,700/- per month in 2011-12. The said amount was increased from time to time but neither the petitioner was engaged against sanctioned post nor was he a daily wage worker. 5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for both sides and perused the record with their able assistance. 6. From the perusal of record, it is evident that petitioner was not engaged after 01.04.2016. He was not engaged as daily wage worker or contractual worker whereas he was a part time worker. The working hours were only four in 2016 when his services were dispensed with. The petitioner is not working with the respondent for last 9 years, thus, he cannot claim benefit of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jaggo (supra). 7. In the wake of above discussion and findings, this Court does not find any compelling reason to direct the respondents to regularize the petitioner, however, this order would not inhibit the respondents to engage the petitioner in future on daily wage or part time basis. The respondent shall release outstanding salary, if any, of the petitioner within two months from today. 8. Disposed of in above terms. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 19.08.2025 Mohit Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHIT KUMAR 2025.08.19 16:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.