1 2026:CGHC:22603 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3132 of 2022 1 - Savendra Baghel S/o Late Bukchand Baghel Aged About 51 Years Working As Pump Operator (On The Post Of Safai Karmchari) At Zonal Office 7, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Urban Administration And Development Department, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Municipal Corporation Raipur Through- Its Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vinod Kumar Deshmukh, Advocate For State : Mr. Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer For respondent No.3 : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 13.05.2026 Heard. 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “A. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to consider and take appropriate action/decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 14.03.2022 and 22.03.2022 to the Respondent no. 2 & 3 respectively for grant of regular appointment w.e.f. 07.10.1992 to the post of Pump Operator/Line Man or 19.10.1993 i.e. from the date when other daily wages employee have been given appointment on regular pay scale on REKHA SINGH -2- their respective posts. B.That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to grant regular pay scale of Pump Operator on completion of 3 years of service from the initial date of B. appointment dated 07.10.1992 w.e.f. 07.10.1995 with arrears of salary. C. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to grant arrears of salary w.e.f. 07.10.1992 till 06.06.2008 and also further directed to revise the pay scale of the petitioner treating him as a regular employee w.e.f. 07.10.1992 and recalculate the salary and pay the arrears accordingly with interest. D. That, this Hon'ble Court further may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to pay the other service benefits like benefit of Kramonnati, Higher Pay Scale etc. on completion of 10, 12 and 24 years of service w.e.f. 07.10.1992 treating him as a regular employee and also grant seniority from the said date. E. Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.” 2. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was offered compassionate appointment on monthly basis payment vide order dated 07.10.1992. He would further submit that services of similarly situated daily-wage employees were regularized vide order dated 19.10.1993 but name of the petitioner was not considered. He would contend that the petitioner made various representations but initially no heed was paid and consequently, his services were regularized vide order dated 06.06.2008. Mr. Deshmukh would argue that the petitioner has made representation before respondents No.2 & 3 claiming therein regular pay scale from 07.10.1993 or 07.10.1995. 3 He would further argue that after completion of three years of service, the petitioner became entitled to receive regular pay scale from 07.10.1995. He would submit that a direction may be issued to respondents No.2 & 3 to decide pending representation dated 22.03.2022. 3. On the other hand, learned counsels appearing for the respondents would oppose submissions. Mr. Gupta would submit that services of the petitioner were regularized vide order dated 06.06.2008 pursuant to Circular dated 05.03.2008. He would further submit that the petitioner cannot claim parity with the employees whose services were regularized in the year 1993. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record. 5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. Deshmukh, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.2 & 3 to decide the pending representation dated 22.03.2022 expeditiously preferably within a period of 150 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha