Disposed

Budharu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC12 Sept 2024WPS/4539/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, appointed as daily-rated employees in 1982, sought regularization. The State initially deferred action citing a pending writ petition. The High Court, noting the other petition was disposed of, directed the competent authority to decide the regularization claim within 90 days following a representation by the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Competent Authority to decide regularization claim within 90 days of receipt of order copy.

Budharu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

2024:CGHC:35964

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 4539 of 2021

¶6

1 - Budharu S/o Manrakhan Lodhi Aged About 57 Years Working As Labour At Present Posted At Sub Minor Khairagarh Sub Division Khairagarh, Water Resources Department Division Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh R/o Village Birutola P. O. And Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶7

2 - Tiharu S/o Manrakhan Lodhi Aged About 52 Years Working As Labour At Present Posted At Sub Minor Khairagarh Sub Division Khairagarh, Water Resources Department Division Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh R/o Village Birutola P. O. And Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶8

3 - Sarju Ram S/o Samaru Marar Aged About 52 Years Working As Labour At Present Posted At Sub Minor Khairagarh Sub Division Khairagarh, Water Resources Department Division Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh R/o Village Hatbanja P. O. And Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶9

4 - Panchram Alias Panchu S/o Darbari Sahu Aged About 58 Years Working As Labour At Present Posted At Sub Minor Khairagarh Sub Division Khairagarh, Water Resources Department Division Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh R/o Village Kanimera, P. O. Khudmudi Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Petitioners

¶11

versus

¶12

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

2 - Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godavari Kachhar Water Resources Department Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶14

3 - Executive Engineer Department Of Water Resources Department, Division Chuikhadan, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

¶17

For Petitioners : Shri F.S. Khare, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Atanu Ghosh, Dy. G.A.

¶18

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶19

13.09.2024

¶20

1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following

¶21

reliefs:-

¶22

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition and be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 19.3.2021 (Annexure P/8) and be pleased to further direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners forthwith.

¶23

10.2 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be call for the records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioners matter.

¶24

10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.”

¶25

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were appointed as daily-rated employee in the year 1982 in Water Resources Department, Division Chhuikhadan. He would further argue that the claim of the petitioners for regularization has not been considered by the respondents only on the ground that WPS No. 3964 of 2015 is pending before this Court. He would submit that the reason assigned by respondent No.2 is erroneous and not sustainable in the eyes of law.

¶26

1. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that WPS No.3964 of 2015 has already been disposed of on

¶27

¶28

13.9.2024 and therefore, there is no hurdle in taking decision on the claim of the petitioners with regard to regularization.

¶29

1. Taking into consideration the submissions made by counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to make a representation before the respondent authorities claiming therein regularization in accordance with the Rules/ Law and the Competent Authority is directed to decide the same, preferably, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order as WPS No.3964 of 2015 has already been disposed of, therefore, the reason assigned in the letter dated 19.3.2021 would not come in

¶30

the way.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶33

Nimmi

Budharu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budharu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jainandan Kumar Patel Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Miss Kanchan Som Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Sinha Vs Jethuram Sinha and Ors.

Shri Gangajali Education Society, Vs Bhilai Municipal Corporation

Padamini Vs Ishwar and Anr.

Budharu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh