1 CGHC010299762026 2026:CGHC:37727 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5998 of 2026 1 - Uttam Kumar Kathoriya S/o Late Shri Sona Ram Katholiya, Aged About 32 Years At Present Peon, Daily Wages Employee In Post Matric Aadivasi Balak Chhatrawas Block -Chhura, District Gariyaband R/o Ward No. 10, Mamuli Para, Village And Block- Chhura, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 2 - Khetan Bai W/o Shri Ghana Ram, Aged About 43 Years At Present Peon, Daily Wages Employee In Pre Matric Kanya Chhatrawas Ruwad, Block -Chhura, District Gariyaband R/o Ward No. 04, Village Parsada Block- Chhura, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 3 - Parvati Yadav, W/o Shri Harihar Yadav Aged About 49 Years At Present Peon, Daily Wages Employee In Kanya Aashram, Sabhinkachhar, Indagaon Block -Mainpur,, District Gariyaband R/o Ward No.05, Sabhinkachhar, Indagaon Block- Mainpur District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - Begobai Yadav, W/o Shri Devlal Yadav Aged About 42 Years At Present Peon, Daily Wages Employee In Kanya Aashram, Sabhinkachhar, Indagaon Block -Mainpur,, District Gariyaband R/o Ward No.09, Sabhinkachhar, Indagaon Block- Mainpur District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Tribal And Schedule Caste Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District -Raipur (C.G.) AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.08.24 10:51:13 +0530 2 2 - The Commissioner Tribal And Schedule Caste Development Department, Directorate, Block -4 D, Ground Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar , Raipur District -Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - The Assistant Commissioner Tribal And Schedule Caste Development Department, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) Respondents (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. J.N. Nande, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Verma, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 21/08/2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent authority to regularize the services of the petitioners on their respective posts, pursuant to the circular dated 05.03.2008 from the date when the similarly situated persons have been regularized and also by the orders of regularization issued by the respondent No.4 dated 28/02/2022 & 18/10/2024. 2. Case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the petitioners are presently working on their respective posts in department of respondent as daily wager and have completed more than 16 years in their services. The petitioners are having all the requisite qualifications for holding the said post. The petitioners submitted their detailed representation to the respondent authorities for considering their case for regular appointment. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the action on the part of the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary, 3 discriminatory in nature and also violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are a daily wager since long. Learned counsel further submits that by the orders of regularization dated 28/02/2022 and 18/10/2024, issued by the respondent No.4, the similar situated employees have been regularized and as per the same, the petitioners also seeking for regularization in their respective services. In support of his contention, learned counsel has relied on the judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Manoj Kumar Nirmalkar v. State of Chhattisgarh1 4. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State would oppose the contention of the counsel for the petitioners. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari and Others v. The State of Jharkhand and Others2 held in para 11 as under: "11. Under the circumstances, we are of the view that the Regularization Rules must be given a pragmatic interpretation and the appellants, if they have completed 10 years of service on the date of promulgation of the Regularization Rules, ought to be given the benefit of the service rendered by them. If they have completed 10 years of service they should be regularized unless there is some 1 WPS No. 4293 of 2012 (decided on 10/02/2023 2 Civil Appeal Nos. 7423-7429 of 2018 (decided on 01/08/2018) 4 valid objection to their regularization like misconduct etc." 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petition is allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to inspect the records of others similarly situated employees when their services were regularized in the year 2022 & 2024. If the case of the petitioners are also found to be similar to those daily wagers whose services were regularized, their services be also regularized from the same date. It is also directed that all this exercise be completed within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep