Petitioner sought regularisation as an Ayurvedic Medical Assistant. The court dismissed the petition, holding that no lawful right was created due to initial procedural violations, and at this belated stage, the petitioner failed to prove legal appointment despite previous judicial observations.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 637 of 2014
1 - Bharat Lal Nirmalkar S/o Kaliram Nirmalkar Aged About 46 Years R/o Khamaria, Post Kunda, Tahsil Pandariya, Distt. Kawardha Kabeerdham , Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Public Health And Welfare Mahanadi Mantralaya Naya Raipur, Post Office and Police Station Naya Raipur, Dist. Raipur Chhattisgarh
2 - Director Ayurved Yog Evam Prakrutik Chiktsa Yunani Siddha Evam Homeopathy Ayush, Raipur District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4 - Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pandariya, Kawardha, Distt. Kabeerdham District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh
5 - Divisional Officer, Ayurved Officer, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents
| For the Appellants | : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate |
|---|---|
| For the State/R-1, R-2 & R-4 | : Mr. Devesh Kela, Advocate |
| For respondents 3 | : Ms. Reena Singh, Advocate. |
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri, Judge
Judgment on Board
(02.04.2024)
2
merged with the Janpad Panchayat with the State, the petitioner submitted his joining by Annexure P-6 dated 19.04.1988. However, his joining was not accepted on the ground that no further instructions was received. Being faced with such situation, the petitioner filed the petition before the High Court bearing W.P. No.790 of 2003 and this Court on 08th February, 2013 passed the following order :
9. On perusal of the documents, it is found that the post held by the Nohar i.e., Compounder as well as Medicine Attendant, held by the Bharat, were clearly described in the memo dated 30.08.1988 wherein it was decided to absorb the services of Ayurved Medical Officer, Compounder, Dawasaz/ Medicine Attendant. Thus, the contention of the State/respondents for not considering the petitioners for absorption, is contrary to the facts.
10. However, since the petitioners have also not done anything for about 15 years before making representation firstly, by Nohar in the year 1999 and by Bharat, in the year 2003, and accepted the position as it is, in the facts of the case, as afore-stated. The reply of the State respondents is contrary to the facts. It is directed that if fresh representation is made the authorities shall consider the same in accordance with the scheme, which was prevalent at the time and pass the order in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
3
rejecting the representation was passed. He would submit that though one of the similarly situated other employee has been given benefit but in respect of the petitioner,the same has not been extended. Therefore, the rejection order of representation dated 09.4.2013 be set aside and the petitioner be allowed to join the duties with respondent.
4
wherein this Court has passed the order directing the petitioner to file representation.
Sd/-
(Goutam Bhaduri) Judge
R a o
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, whose appointment was alleged to be non-compliance with rules, is entitled to regularisation as a state employee after a long dormant period.
Whether the rejection of the petitioner's fresh representation for regularisation is legally sustainable in the absence of evidence of due process.
Bharat Lal Nirmalkar
State of Chhattisgarh
Goutam Bhaduri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
