1 2026:CGHC:24479 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 176 of 2023 1 - Raju Singh Porte S/o Ramdayal Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Dongritola, Post Korja, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Public Health And Engineering Department Through Chief Engineer, Public Health And Engineering Department, Bilaspur Region, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Public Health And Engineering Department, Through Superintending Engineer, Public Health And Engineering, Department, Bilaspur Region, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Public Health And Engineering Department, Through Executive Engineer, Public Health And Engineering Department, Bilaspur Region District Bilaspur Chhattigsarh. 4 - Public Health And Engineering Department, Through Divisional Accounts Officer, Public Health And Engineering Department, Bilaspur Region District Bilaspur Chhattigsarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Yash Verma, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Dy.G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board NIRMALA RAO 2 17.6.2026 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “10.1 To call the records of the case no. 23/I.D. Act/Ref./2018. 10.2 To issue an appropriate Writ to set aside the order dated 26.08.2023 passed by the Ld. Court, Bilaspur, C.G. in the matter of 23/1.D. Act/Ref./2018, Raju Singh Porte Vs. Public Health and engineering Department, through the Chief Engineer, and ors. 10.3 To issue an appropriate Writ to lead the evidences by both the parties before the Ld. Labour Court in the matter of 23/1.D. Act/Ref./2018. 10.4 Any other relief which this High Court may deems fit.” 2) The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed as a daily- wage labourer in the year 1988 under respondent No.4. His services were discontinued in the year 1991 and therefore, he approached the learned Labour Court in the year 1997. Learned Labour Court passed an award of reinstatement with back-wages on 3.3.1997. Thereafter, the petitioner was reinstated in service on the post of Helper and the back-wages were also paid to him. The services of the petitioner were regularized vide order dated 14.8.2008 on the post of Handpump Helper instead of Handpump Mechanic. The petitioner moved two applications claiming therein difference in salary, seniority and other consequential benefits from 14.1.2009. The respondents filed reply to both the 3 applications denying the averments made therein. Learned Labour Court, after considering the material available on record, rejected both the applications and imposed a cost of Rs.15,000/-. Aggrieved by the said order dated 26.8.2023, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner was appointed on the post of Handpump Helper, he was in fact discharging duties as a Handpump Mechanic and therefore, he was entitled to the salary attached to the post of Handpump Mechanic. He would submit that the petitioner claimed the differential amount to the tune of Rs.4,39,92,250/- with interest @18% per annum. He would further submit that the petitioner claimed seniority and other benefits from the year 1988, when he was initially appointed, till the date of reinstatement, i.e. 3.3.1997. He would submit that the learned Labour Court erred in declining the claim of the petitioner. He would also argue that the learned Labour Court, without any sufficient cause, imposed a cost of Rs.15,000/- only on the ground that the applications remained pending from 25.4.2018. He would pray to set aside the order dated 26.8.2023. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that initially the petitioner was appointed as a daily-wage labourer under respondent No.4 and his services were discontinued in the year 1991. He would contend that the 4 petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the learned Labour Court, pursuant to which an award of reinstatement with back- wages was passed. It is also argued that the petitioner has already received the amount of back-wages and his services were regularized vide order dated 14.8.2008. He would submit that the petitioner failed to adduce any documentary evidence to establish that he was working as a Handpump Mechanic and therefore, the learned Labour Court rightly rejected the applications moved by the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner did not claim seniority and other consequential benefits before the learned Labour Court at the time when the dispute regarding discontinuation of service was raised, and for the first time in the year 2018 he moved applications before the learned Labour Court and thus, the said applications were hit by principle of constructive res judicata. He would submit that the learned Labour Court has rightly imposed a cost of Rs.15,000/- as the petitioner failed to submit relevant material in support of his claim. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed in the file. 6) A perusal of the record would show that except for the muster rolls, the petitioner had not placed on record a single document to establish that he was working as a Handpump Mechanic under respondent No.4. 5 7) With regard to the claim of seniority and other benefits, the petitioner should have claimed all such reliefs before the learned Labour Court at the time when the dispute regarding discontinuation of service was raised. Since no such claim was made before the learned Labour Court at that stage, the subsequent claim would be hit by principle of res judicata. However, with regard to cost imposed by the learned Labour Court, the same appears to be harsh. The petitioner had claimed seniority and difference in wages and he cannot be refrained from raising such claims. Therefore, that part of the order imposing cost is hereby set aside, while the remaining part of the order dated 26.8.2023 is hereby affirmed. 8) Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi