1 2026:CGHC:2944 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 523 of 2026 • Sapna Mandal D/o Shri Sanatan Mandal, Aged About 37 Years R/o Sanatan Mandal Hotel, Infront Of Old Bus Stand, Tehsilpara Bijapur, Police Station Bijapur, District Bijapur C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Public Health And Engineering Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2. Engineer In Chief, Public Health And Engineering Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3. Superintendent Engineer, Public Health And Engineering Department Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.). 4. Executive Engineer, Public Health And Engineering Department, Division Bijapur, District Bijapur (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 19/01/2026 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call record in the case of petitioner. 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent Authorities to consider the case of Petitioner, regarding regularization on the post of DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 Chemist in pursuance to circular dated 05.03.2008 and Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari and others as well as passed in case of Jaggo Vs. Union of India. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondents to consider the case of petitioner for regularization taking into account of seniority. 10.4 The Hon’ble Court mauy kindly be pleased to direct respondents to regularize the service from his junior’s has been regularized. 10.5 That, the cost of the petition be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is appointed as Chemist on daily wage basis, after participating in due selection process. Since, the initial engagement, petitioner is continuously working on the said post on daily wage basis and as of now petitioner has completed above 13 years on daily wage basis. He further contended that in view of the aforementioned law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, petitioner is also entitled for his consideration for regularization on the post, on which, he is working since last more than about 13 years. He, however, submits that at this stage he may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before the authorities and authorities be directed to take decision on the representation expeditiously thereafter. 3. Learned State counsel submits that as petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and only seeking permission to submit representation to be considered by authorities, he is having no objection to the limited prayer. 4. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the parties, considering the nature of the claim as raised by the petitioner in this writ petition, he is continuously engaged as daily wage employee since 2013. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Others Versus State of Jharkhan & Others reported in SCC (L&S) 2018 (2) 472 for 3 considering the temporary/daily wages employees, who had completed 10 years of service for regularization. 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. Without entering into merit of the claim of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed at this stage, permitting the petitioner to submit comprehensive representation before the respondents No.2 to 4, 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 four months from the date of receipt of representation. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Interlocutory application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Deepti Jha