1 2026:CGHC:19522 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3642 of 2026 1 - Urmila Netam W/o Late Mr. Sanwlu Ram Netam Aged About 60 Years Post Peon (Daily Wages), Posted At Nagar Panchayat Charama, Tehsil Charama, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Chhattisgarh 492002 2 - The Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat, Charama, Tehsil - Charama, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh 3 - Director Urban Administration And Development Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Joint Director Urban Administration And Development, Bastar Division, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 28/04/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may call for records from the respondents. 2 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may issue an appropriate writ or direction on the Respondent Authorities to regularize the petitioner as Peon when she became eligible. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may issue direction to the respondents to decide the representation filed by the petitioner in a time bound manner. 10.4 The Hon’ble Court may grant any other relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submit that the petitioner was initially engaged as daily-wage employee on 15.05.1991 against the vacant post of Peon and since then, she is continuously working as daily-wage employee against the vacant sanctioned post of Peon. Petitioner has again submitted representation based upon which, in the meeting of the President-in-Council, resolution is passed to forward the proposal of regularization of petitioner to the higher authorities, However, since then, no order has been passed. He contended recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhola Nath Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors. [SLP (Civil) No.30762 of 2024] has considered the issue of regularization of the daily-wage/temporary employees and therefore, direction be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of petitioner and to regularize the service of the petitioner on the sanctioned vacant post of Peon. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents/State submits the grievance of the petitioner is against the Respondent No. 2 for whom, she is not appearing. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 5. Claim as raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is that he is continuously working as daily wage employee for more than about 10 years. 6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Others Versus State of Jharkhand & Others reported in SCC (L&S) 2018 (2) 472 considered the issue of claim of regularization of temporary/daily wages employees, who had completed 10 years of service. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Jaggo Versus Union of India reported in (2024) SCC Online SC 3826 has further observed that the government departments to lead by example in providing fair and stable employment. Engaging workers on a temporary basis for extended periods, especially when their roles are integral to the organization's functioning, not only contravenes international labour standards but also exposes the organization to legal challenges and undermines employee morale. 7. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bhola Nath (Supra) and connected Special Leave Petitions (Civil) vide its order dated 30th January 2026 has observed that respondent -State was not justified in continuing the appellant's services on sanctioned posts for over a decade under nomenclature of contractual engagement and thereafter denying them consideration for regularization and have further directed for regularizing the appellants therein, in service. 8. Recently, Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Dharam Singh & Ors. Vs. State of UP & Anr. (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1735) has strongly 4 deprecated the culture of “ad-hocism” adopted by States in their capacity as employers. Hon’ble Supreme Court also criticized the practice of outsourcing or informalizing recruitment as a means to evade regular employment obligations, observing that such measures perpetuate precarious working conditions while circumventing fair and lawful engagement practices and observed thus: “17. Before concluding, we think it necessary to recall that the State (here referring to both the Union and the State governments) is not a mere market participant but a constitutional employer. It cannot balance budgets on the backs of those who perform the most basic and recurring public functions. Where work recurs day after day and year after year, the establishment must reflect that reality in its sanctioned strength and engagement practices. The long- term extraction of regular labour under temporary labels corrodes confidence in public administration and offends the promise of equal protection. Financial stringency certainly has a place in public policy, but it is not a talisman that overrides fairness, reason and the duty to organise work on lawful lines. 18. Moreover, it must necessarily be noted that “ad-hocism” thrives where administration is opaque. The State Departments must keep and produce accurate establishment registers, muster rolls and outsourcing arrangements, and they must explain, with evidence, why they prefer precarious engagement over sanctioned posts where the work is perennial. If “constraint” is invoked, the record should show what alternatives were considered, why similarly placed workers were treated differently, and how the chosen course aligns with Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Sensitivity to the human consequences of prolonged insecurity is not sentimentality. It is a constitutional discipline 5 that should inform every decision affecting those who keep public offices running. x x x 20. We have framed these directions comprehensively because, case after case, orders of this Court in such matters have been met with fresh technicalities, rolling “reconsiderations,” and administrative drift which further prolongs the insecurity for those who have already laboured for years on daily wages. Therefore, we have learned that Justice in such cases cannot rest on simpliciter directions, but it demands imposition of clear duties, fixed timelines, and verifiable compliance. As a constitutional employer, the State is held to a higher standard and therefore it must organise its perennial workers on a sanctioned footing, create a budget for lawful engagement, and implement judicial directions in letter and spirit. Delay to follow these obligations is not mere negligence but rather it is a conscious method of denial that erodes livelihoods and dignity for these workers. The operative scheme we have set here comprising of creation of supernumerary posts, full regularization, subsequent financial benefits, and a sworn affidavit of compliance, is therefore a pathway designed to convert rights into outcomes and to reaffirm that fairness in engagement and transparency in administration are not matters of grace, but obligations under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.” 9. Taking into consideration that the petitioner is engaged as daily wage employee for more than 10 years, the circular issued by the State Government dated 05.03.2008 for regularization of daily wage/temporary employee and the relief as claimed by petitioner for regularization of his services as also considering the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above mentioned cases, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting petitioner to submit fresh 6 comprehensive representation and direction be issued to the Respondents No. 1 to 4 to consider and take decision on the representations submitted by the petitioner keeping in mind the period of service which the petitioners have completed of about 10 years as also the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue of regularization of daily wage/temporary employee, expeditiously, in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 04 months from the date of receipt of order. It is ordered accordingly. 10. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY