1 2026:CGHC:10199 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2115 of 2026 Bhikhari Ram S/o Shri Paklu Ram Aged About 48 Years 105 (Kh) Behind 36 Quarter Gali Maharani Ward 14, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary Public Health Engineering Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Engineer-In-Chief Public Health Engineering Department, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Superintending Engineer Public Health Engineering Department, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer Public Health Engineering Department, Division - Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh.. Respondents 2 (Cause title taken from Case information System) For Petitioner : Shri Ritesh Giri appears on behalf of Shri Amod Kumar Shrivastava, Advocates. For Respondents/State : Shri Siddhanth Sharma, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 27.02.2026 1. The Petitioner has filed this Petition for the following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent Authorities to consider the case of Petitioner, regarding regularization on the post of Data Entry operator in pursuance to order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari and others as well as passed in case of Jaggo Vs. Union of India. 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to directed Respondents to consider the case of Petitioner for regularization taking into account of seniority. 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to directed respondents to regularized the services of petitioner, from his junior's has been regularized. 10.4 That the cost of the Petition be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is appointed as Driver on daily wage basis. Since, the initial engagement, Petitioner has been continuously working on the said post on daily wage basis and as of now he has completed more than 10 years on daily wage basis. He contended that in view of 3 the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Petitioner is also entitled for his consideration for regularization on the post, on which, he has been working since last more than about 10 years. He however, submits that at this stage, the Petitioner may be permitted to submit fresh representation before the appropriate authorities and the said authorities may 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 the authorities, he is having no objection to the limited prayer. 4. On due consideration of the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties and having regard to the nature of the claim raised by the Petitioner in the present Writ Petition, it is noted that the Petitioner has been continuously engaged as a daily wage employee since the year 2008. Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Narendra Kumar Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand, reported in SCC (L&S) 2018 (2) 472, has considered the issue relating to the claim for regularization of temporary/daily wage employees who have completed ten years of continuous service. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court ,in 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 4 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. 5. In above facts of the case and decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Writ Petition, at this stage, is disposed of permitting the Petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation before Respondent Nos. 2 to 4. In the event such representation is submitted, the concerned authorities shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of four months from the date of receipt thereof. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Priya