Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12812 (CHH)

MILIND PATIL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/843/2026 · 2026-02-05

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:6696 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 843 of 2026 1 - Milind Patil S/o I.D. Patil Aged About 57 Years R/o Ward No. 24, Nandori Janjgiri, Tehsil Kumhari, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Bhushan Lal Sahu S/o Nand Ram Sahu Aged About 58 Years R/o Ward No. 55, Hscl Colony, Civic Centre Bhilai, Tahsil And Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Mohd. Faruk S/o Mohd. Yakub Aged About 59 Years R/o Mig 1-1064, Ward No. 57, Amdi Nagar Hudko, Bhilai, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sudesh Babar S/o Dwarka Rao Babar Aged About 55 Years R/o Chouhan Green Valley, Junwani Bhilai, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director (T.B. Control) Department, 3rd Floor Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District Hospital Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Patil, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel lawyer ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.02.07 17:31:05 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 06/02/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be directed to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regulariza- tion in service and other benefits from the date which they were entitled. 10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper according to the facts and circumstances of the case along with the cost of the petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioners were appointed as permanent employee of Health and Family Welfare Department. Since, the initial engagement, petitioners are continuously working on the said post on daily wage basis and as of now petitioners have completed more than 20 years as daily wage employees. He further contended that in view of their long engagement in service, petitioners are also entitled for their consideration to be regularized on the post, on which, they are working since last more than about 20 years. He, however, submits that at this stage he may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before the authorities and in turn they be directed to take decision on the representation expeditiously thereafter. 3. Learned State counsel submits that as petitioners are not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking permission to submit representation to be considered by authorities, he is having no objection to the limited prayer. 3 4. Considered the submission of counsel for the parties. Claim as raised by the petitioners in this writ petition is that they are continuously engaged as daily wage employee since 2003. 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 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. This writ petition at this stage is disposed permitting the petitioners to submit comprehensive representation before the respondents No. 2 and 3, and if, such a representation is submitted, the concerned authority shall consider and take decision on the representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 04 months from the date of receipt of representation. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE alfiza