1 CGHC010215372020 2026:CGHC:36041 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3879 of 2020 Vidyanand Yadav, S/o. Bodhram Yadav, Aged About 49 Years, R/o. Mohalla Jagdalla, Champa, Ward No. 26, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Forest Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Chief Conservator Of Forest, Aranya Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant : Ms. Pranoti Das, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.08.14 14:21:19 +0530 2 (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 13.08.2026 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.08.2020 (Annexure P-1) by which the petitioner’s representation for regularization has been rejected finding no merit. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the finding recorded by the competent authority is contrary to the finding recoded by the Labour Court, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. Learned State counsel would support the impugned order and submit that the instant petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents meticulously. 5. By an award dated 01.03.2014, the Labour Court has clearly recorded a finding that the petitioner had worked for 10 years against a vacant post and from 01.12.1990 to 28.02.2000, he had continuously worked and he had attained permanency also. The said finding has attained finality, as it has not been challenged by the State by filing writ petition before this Court. However, while considering the application’s application for regularization, the 3 competent authority has recorded a finding that the petitioner had not worked against a sanctioned post and, therefore, he is not entitled for regularization, which is contrary to the finding recorded by the Labour Court. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.08.2020 is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Divisional Forest Officer, Janjgir-Champa, for fresh consideration of the petitioner’s claim for regularization, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge