1 CGHC010184672026 2026:CGHC:38946 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4230 of 2026 Hemlal Pradhan S/o Shri Parasuram Pradhan Aged About 47 Years Occupation Service, Posted As Peon (Collector Rate) At Mahila Bal Vikas Vibhag, Mainpur, Block Mainpur, Distt. Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Women And Child Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Gariyaband, Distt. Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Program Officer Women And Child Development Department, Gariyaband, Distt. Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Project Officer Integrated Child Development Project, Mainpur, Distt. Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Apurva Nigam, PL Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 02.09.2026 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a relief to regularize his services considering the fact that he has been working since last 19 years. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2026.09.02 16:48:57 +0530 2 appointed as Daily Wage employee in the year 2007. He would contend that the petitioner has completed more than 19 years of his service and there is no complaint against him, but till date his claim for regularization has not been considered. He would contend that circular dated 05.03.2008 has been issued by the State Government, wherein, guidelines have been framed to consider the case of Daily Wage employee for regularization. It is contended that though the petitioner made representation before respondent No. 3, but till date no decision has been taken. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose and submits that the petitioner is Daily Wage employee and he was not appointed against sanctioned and vacant post, therefore, he has no right to claim regularization. She further submits that instant petitions deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization in light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Narendra Kumar Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand, (2018) 8 SCC 238 and Jaggo v. Union of India and others, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3826. The petitioner would be at liberty to make a fresh representation before respondent No. 3, and the said authority is directed to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, keeping 3 in mind the above-referred judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, preferably within a period of 90 days. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petitions are hereby disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Rahul