1 CGHC010006302022 2026:CGHC:34219 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 173 of 2022 Sumer Singh Dhruv S/o Salikram, Aged About 59 Years Peon, District Election office, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1- State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue And Aapad Prabhndhan Department, Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.S. Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector, Durg (Chhattisgarh), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Satya Kumar Mandloi, Advocate alonogwith Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Kawaljeet Singh Saini, Deputy Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief:- “10.1. That, so it will be in the ends of justice that petitioner may kindly be ordered to make fresh representation to the Collector, who may be directed to consider regularization of petitioner by virtue of circular dated 17-03-1978 of the State Govt. on regular pay scale as is contained in 2016 Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 (1) MPWN 36 Ram Kumar Bairagi V/s Tribal Welfare Department expeditiously preferably within a period of 45 days from the receipt of order of Honble High Court, so that petitioner may receive justice at an early date as ordered on 28-01- 2016 in WPS No. 292/2016 Smt. Leela Devi Mahant V/s State of CG. 10.2. Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Peon under the District Election Office in the year 1998. He would further submit that the petitioner has not been extended the benefit of the regular pay scale pursuant to Circular dated 17.03.1978. He would also submit that the petitioner has completed more than 25 years of service under the respondents, but no decision has been taken in this regard. He would contend that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble High Court in the matter of Ramkumar Bairagi v. Tribal Welfare Department, 2016 (I)MPWN 36 with a direction to the authorities to decide the representation expeditiously. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Saini, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by Mr. 3 Kushwaha and submit that petitioner has no right to claim regularization, regular appointment, or regular pay scale, as he was appointed on temporary basis; thus, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Having considered the limited prayer made by Mr. Kushwaha, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a detailed representation before respondent No. 2 within a period of 30 days. If such representation is made, respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the same within a further period of 90 days. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim