1 / 3 2026:CGHC:11609 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2349 of 2026 1 - Suresh Kumar Verma Son Of Ubheram Verma Aged About 52 Years Resident Of Vidya Nagar, Civil Line, Khairagarh, Disrict - Khairagarh- Chhuikhandan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Tejnarayan Verma Son Of Krishna Kumar Verma Aged About 33 Years Resident Of Harduwa, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ajeet Yadav Son Of Jawahar Lal Yadav Aged About 50 Years Resident Of Walmiki Ambedkar Awas, Gourinagar, Rajnadgaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Nilesh Verma Son Of Pyarelal Verma Aged About 33 Years R/o Sandi, Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Vedprakash Sahu Son Of Yashwant Sahu Aged About 32 Years Resident Of Ward No.16, Bhedikala, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Vinod Kumar Son Of Bholaram Aged About 33 Years Resident Of Village - Pendra, Tahsil - Pipariya, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.03.12 11:44:27 +0530 2 / 3 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Cooperative Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Chairman/chief Executive Officer District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Gaurav Singhal, Advocate For Resp. No.1/State : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer For Resp. No.2 : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 11/03/2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners No. 1 to 6 were appointed as daily wage employee in the year 1999,2014,2014,2014,2017,2014 respectively on different Class-IV posts and since then, they are continuously working with respective respondents. He contended that as of now petitioners have already completed more than 10 years as daily wage employee and, therefore, in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Narendra Kumar Tiwari and Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors. (2018) 8 SCC 238, petitioners are entitled for regularization. Petitioners have already submitted representation before respondent No.2, however, till date, no decision has been taken and therefore, respondent No.2 be directed to take decision on pending representation at the earliest. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that as the petitioners are not pressing this writ petition on merit and only seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and take decision on 3 / 3 representation, she is having no objection. She submits that if representation is still pending consideration, it will be considered and decided strictly in accordance with law. 3. On due consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition at this stage is disposed off directing respondent No.2 to take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioners for regularization of their service, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 4. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge al昀椀za