1 2026:CGHC:7901 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9488 of 2023 1 - Shree Kumari D/o Nansai Aged About 45 Years Working On The Post Of Sweeper As Daily Wager Employee And Posted At Govt. Girls Hostel Batauli, Block Batauli, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 2 - Nano Bai W/o Ramesh Singh Aged About 44 Years Working As Daily Wager Employee On The Post Of Rasoiya And Posted At Pahadi Korva, Balak Ashram, Baijnapur, Batauli, Block Batauli, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector (Tribal Development) Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 3 - Block Education Officer Batauli, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. 4 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Panel Lawyer. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 12/02/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners has prayed for following reliefs:- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioners, in the interest of justice. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization strictly taking into account of seniority and experience within time frame, in the interest of justice. (iii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, petitioner No. 1 was initially appointed as a Sweeper on a daily wage basis in the year 2008 and has since been posted at Government Girls Hostel, Batauli, Block Batauli, District Sarguja (C.G.), where she has been discharging her duties sincerely, diligently, and without any complaint; similarly, petitioner No. 2 was initially appointed as a Rasoiya on a daily wage basis in the year 2014 and posted at Pahadi Korva Balak Ashram, Baijnapur, Batauli, Block Batauli, District Sarguja (C.G.), and has been performing her duties honestly and satisfactorily without any adverse remark. It is further submitted that the Sarpanch and Secretary of Gram Panchayat, 3 Batauli, in their meeting dated 22.12.2014, recommended the regularization of the services of petitioner No. 2. Moreover, the Superintendent of Girls Hostel, Batauli, has issued an experience certificate certifying that petitioner No. 2 has been continuously performing her duties sincerely and honestly on a temporary contractual basis without any complaint. It is also submitted that the learned Collector, Scheduled Tribes Development Branch, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh, vide order dated 20.01.2022, directed that daily wage workers of Class IV category are entitled to regularization and to the pay scale of Rs. 4750–7440 with Grade Pay Rs. 1300, and similarly, the learned Collector, Scheduled Tribes Development Branch, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, vide order dated 24.02.2022, granted regularization and the applicable pay scale of Rs. 4750–7440 with Grade Pay Rs. 1300, along with the revised pay scale of Rs. 15600–49400, Level-01, to similarly situated Class IV daily wage employees. That despite the petitioners having completed more than ten years of continuous service and having submitted representations and repeated requests before the concerned respondent authorities for regularization of their services, no action has been taken till date, compelling the petitioners to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities of not considering petitioners for regularization is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory in 4 nature and also violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are daily wagers since long. He would further submit that the State government has regularized the services of similarly situated daily wage employees on the basis of circular dated 12/09/2011, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for regularization of their services on the post of Class- IV employees. He would contend that the issue involved in the present petition has already been dealt with by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Others reported in (2018) 8 SCC 238 and in the matter of Jaggo Vs. Union of India, SLP(C) No. 5580 of 2024 : AIR 2025 SC 296. He would contend that a direction may be issued to the concerned respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in above referred cases. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the same. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari and Others v. The State of Jharkhand and Others held in para 11 as under: “11. Under the circumstances, we are of the view that the Regularization Rules must be given a pragmatic 5 interpretation and the appellants, if they have completed 10 years of service on the date of promulgation of the Regularization Rules, ought to be given the benefit of the service rendered by them. If they have completed 10 years of service they should be regularized unless there is some valid objection to their regularization like misconduct etc.” 7. In case of Jaggo Vs. Union of India, SLP(c) No. 5580 of 2024 : AIR 2025 SC 296 Hon’ble Supreme High Court has held as under:- “19. Thus, in view of the aforesaid enunciation of law and considering the existing factual position of the case in hand, which is not disputed by the respondents in their return, I am also of the considered view that the action of the respondents is a glaring example of arbitrary attitude harassing and exploiting an employee for years together taking his services since long and not extending him benefit of regularization This attitude of the respondents is purely illegal and not appreciable especially for the reason when the petitioner has very specifically taken a stand that while scrutinizing the cases of daily wagers by the Screening Committee, the cases of daily wagers working in Sidhi Division, where the petitioner was working, were not considered. The return is silent to that extent and there is no denial of the said fact therefore, this Court has 6 no hesitation to accept that the said fact is correct and the respondents have illegally denied the claim of the petitioner for regularization making unjustified excuses. The petitioner was not illegally appointed that too when there was a vacant post available, therefore, he cannot be deprived from regularization of his services.” 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the principles law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari (supra) and in the matter of Jaggo (supra), this writ petition is disposed of permitting petitioners to submit fresh representation before the respondents No. 3 & 4 raising all the grounds, and in the event representation is submitted, concerned authority shall take decision on the same in an objective manner, adopting pragmatic approach, keeping in mind the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue, expeditiously, preferably within an period of four months from the date of receipt of representation. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat