Manoj Kumar Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:6182-DB

¶3

NAFR

¶4

Digitally signed by BABLU BABLU RAJENDRA RAJENDRA BHANARKAR BHANARKAR Date: 2026.02.04 16:57:24 +0530

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WA No. 237 of 2025

¶7

1 - Shiv Prasad Kripal S/o Shri Navalu Ram Aged About 32 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Lahattar, Block Durgukondal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶8

2 - Ramashankar Nag S/o Late Ramnath Nag Aged About 50 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Lahattar, Block Durgukondal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶9

3 - Kawal Singh Purame W/o Shri Samaru Ram Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Lahattar, Block Durgukondal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶10

4 - Mahesh Ram Netam S/o Shri Gadaram Netam Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Surahi, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶11

5 - Kaushal Sinha S/o Shri Parmanand Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pandaripani, Block - Charama, District Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶12

6 - Hemant Kumar S/o Shri Hariram Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karaiha, Block - Charama, District Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶13

--- Appellants

¶14

versus

¶15

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Department Of Scheduled Castes And Schedules Tribes Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶16

2

¶17

2 - Secretary Department Of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Adim Jati Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikas Vibhag, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶18

4 - District Education Officer Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶19

5 - Manoj Kumar Netam S/o Shri Shankar Hariram Netam Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Girls Higher Secondary School, Kondagaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶20

6 - Geeteshwari Bhui D/o Shri Tulsi Ram Aged About 33 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bondanar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶21

7 - Shyamlal Komra S/o Shri Kali Ram Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bondanar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶22

8 - Ram Singh Gawade S/o Shri Maan Singh Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bondanar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶23

9 - Narendra Kumar Jain S/o Shri Sajjan Singh Aged About 48 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karregaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶24

10 - Manoj Uike S/o Shri Bisau Ram Aged About 32 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kondagarh, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶25

11 - Shiv Prasad Netam S/o Shri Najaru Ram Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tumasnar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶26

12 - Ram Prasad Baghel S/o Shri Sara Ram Aged About 42 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kolar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶27

3

¶28

13 - Roshan Lal Netam S/o Shri Saraju Ram Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kolar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶29

14 - Ku. Maheshwari Dhruw D/o Shri Ram Ji Ram Aged About 30 Years Working As Peon, Women Higher Secondary School, Antagarh, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶30

15 - Besram Salam S/o Shri Bal Singh Aged About 44 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amodi, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶31

16 - Narendra Nayak S/o Shri Murha Ram Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karregaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶32

17 - Gautamram Kuldeep S/o Shri Ankalu Rama Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Selegaon, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶33

18 - Rajobai Kadiyam D/o Late Shri Bihari Lal Aged About 50 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhiragaon, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶34

19 - Bhupati Ranjan Haldar S/o Late Shri Bhawani Ranjan Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Mayapur, Block Koilebeda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶35

20 - Makhan Banik S/o Shri Kanai Banik Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kapsi, Block Koilebeda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶36

21 - Utphal Banerjee S/o Late Shri Sachin Banerjee Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kapsi, Block Koilebeda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶37

22 - Sevak Prasad Sinha S/o Late Shri Kartik Ram Sinha Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kurrutola, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶38

23 - Nisha Manikpuri D/o Shri Neelam Das Manikpuri Aged About 35 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amoda, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶39

4

¶40

24 - Balram Dheemar S/o Derha Ram Dheemar Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶41

25 - Chandrabhan Netam S/o Shri Dayaram Netam Aged About 34 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhansuli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶42

26 - Ram Singh Patel S/o Shri Dashrath Patel Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tudame, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶43

27 - Yogeshwar Sahu S/o Shri Sudan Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aroud, Block Charma, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶44

28 - Lakhan Ram Rajak S/o Shri Chait Ram Rajak Aged About 47 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aroud, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶45

29 - Mahendra Kumar Mandavi S/o Shri Jayram Mandavi Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kotela, Block Charma, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶46

30 - Bihari Ram Nishad S/o Shri Tetaku Ram Aged About 47 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aawri, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶47

31 - Ray Singh Taram S/o Shri Phul Singh Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶48

32 - Raja Ram Tekam S/o Shri Devlal Tekam Aged About 38 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhansuli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶49

33 - Kamlesh Kumar Sinha S/o Shri Ramdev Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Salegaon, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶50

34 - Dhameshwar Nag S/o Shri Latkhor Ram Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Thanabodi Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶51

5

¶52

35 - Rajkumar Kemro S/o Shri Chatur Singh Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhansuli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶53

36 - Nathiya Ram S/o Shri Shyamlal Aged About 51 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Shahwada, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶54

37 - Pokhanram Sinha S/o Shri Chintaram Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Baijanpur, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶55

38 - Santu Ram Markam S/o Shri Rajaram Markam Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Deogaon, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶56

39 - Vishnu Ram Sahu S/o Shri Dayalu Ram Aged About 34 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kotela, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶57

40 - Rakesh Kumar Salam S/o Shri Devalram Salam Aged About 31 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kuralthemli Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶58

41 - Sriram Poya S/o Shri Devsingh Poya Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tarasgaon, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶59

42 - Yashwant Kumar Jain S/o Shri Gurha Ram Jain Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tarasgaon, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶60

43 - Salik Ram Markam S/o Shri Nandan Singh Markam Aged About 49 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kuralthemli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶61

44 - Jagmohan Jurro S/o Shri Tilochan Ram Jurro Aged About 44 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karaiha Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶62

45 - Rajbati Kashyap W/o Shri Lakhan Ram Kashyap Aged About 44 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tarasgaon, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶63

6

¶64

46 - Pratam Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Phulsingh Yadav Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Chawad, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶65

47 - Kishan Ram Mandavi S/o Shri Budhram Mandavi Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶66

48 - Jana Lange W/o Shri Rajkumar Lange Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Haradula, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶67

49 - Manrakhan Netam S/o Late Shri Dhansai Netam Aged About 42 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kuralthemli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶68

50 - Balram Nishad S/o Shri Rohidas Ram Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Haradula, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶69

51 - Rajendra Markam S/o Shri Sundar Singh Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Puri, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶70

52 - Taram S/o Shri Charan Singh Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Puri, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶71

53 - Suresh Kumar Rajak S/o Shri Siyaram Rajak Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶72

--- Respondent(s)

¶73

WA No. 414 of 2025

¶74

1 - Manoj Kumar Netam S/o Shri Shankar Hariram Netam Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Girls Higher Secondary School, Kondagaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶75

2 - Geeteshwari Bhui D/o Shri Tulsi Ram Aged About 33 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bondanar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶76

7

¶77

3 - Shyamlal Komra S/o Shri Kali Ram Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bondanar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶78

4 - Ram Singh Gawade S/o Shri Maan Singh Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bondanar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶79

5 - Narendra Kumar Jain S/o Shri Sajjan Singh Aged About 48 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karregaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶80

6 - Manoj Uikey S/o Shri Bisau Ram Aged About 32 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kondagaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶81

7 - Shiv Prasad Netam S/o Shri Najaru Ram Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tumasnar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶82

8 - Ram Prasad Baghel S/o Shri Sara Ram Aged About 42 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kolar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶83

9 - Roshan Lal Netam S/o Shri Saraju Ram Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kolar, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶84

10 - Ku. Maheswari Dhruw D/o Shri Ram Ji Ram Aged About 30 Years Working As Peon, Women Higher Secondary School, Antagarh, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶85

11 - Besram Salam S/o Shri Bal Singh Aged About 44 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amodi, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶86

12 - Narendra Nayak S/o Shri Murha Ram Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karregaon, Block Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶87

13 - Gautamram Kuldeep S/o Shri Ankalu Rama Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Selegaon, Block Bhanu Pratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶88

8

¶89

14 - Rajobai Kadiyam D/o Late Shri Bihari Lal Aged About 50 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhiragaon, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶90

15 - Bhupati Ranjan Haldar S/o Late Shri Bhawani Ranjan Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Mayapur, Block Koilebeda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶91

16 - Makhan Banik S/o Shri Kanai Banik Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kapsi, Block Koilebeda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶92

17 - Utphal Banerjee S/o Late Shri Sachin Banerjee Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kapsi, Block Koilebeda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶93

18 - Sevak Prasad Sinha S/o Late Shri Kartik Ram Sinha Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kurrutola, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶94

19 - Nisha Manikpuri D/o Shri Neelam Das Manikpuri Aged About 35 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Amoda, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶95

20 - Balram Dheemar S/o Derha Ram Dheemar Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶96

21 - Chandrabhan Netam S/o Shri Dayaram Netam Aged About 34 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhansuli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶97

22 - Ram Singh Patel S/o Shri Dashrath Patel Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tudame, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶98

23 - Yogeshwar Sahu S/o Shri Sudan Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aroud, Block Charma, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶99

24 - Lakhan Ram Rajak S/o Shri Chait Ram Rajak Aged About 47 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aroud, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶100

9

¶101

25 - Mahendra Kumar Mandavi S/o Shri Jayram Mandavi Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kotela, Block Charma, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶102

26 - Bihari Ram Nishad S/o Shri Tetaku Ram Aged About 47 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aawari, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶103

27 - Ray Singh Taram S/o Shri Phul Singh Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶104

28 - Raja Ram Tekam S/o Shri Devlal Tekam Aged About 38 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhansuli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶105

29 - Kamlesh Kumar Sinha S/o Shri Ramdev Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Salegaon, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶106

30 - Dameshwar Nag S/o Shri Latkhor Ram Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Thanabodi Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶107

31 - Rajkumar Kemro S/o Shri Chatur Singh Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhansuli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶108

32 - Nathiya Ram S/o Shri Shyamlal Aged About 51 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Shahwada, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶109

33 - Pokhanram Sinha S/o Shri Chintaram Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Baijanpur, Block Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶110

34 - Santu Ram Markam S/o Shri Rajaram Markam Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Deogaon, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶111

35 - Vishnu Ram Sahu S/o Shri Dayalu Ram Aged About 34 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kotela, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶112

10

¶113

36 - Rakesh Kumar Salam S/o Shri Devalram Salam Aged About 31 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kuralthemli Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶114

37 - Sriram Poya S/o Shri Devsingh Poya Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tarasgaon, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶115

38 - Yashwant Kumar Jain S/o Shri Gurha Ram Jain Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tarasgaon, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶116

39 - Salik Ram Markam S/o Shri Nandan Singh Markam Aged About 49 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kuralthemli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶117

40 - Rajbati Kashyap W/o Shri Lakhan Ram Kashyap Aged About 44 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Tarasgaon, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶118

41 - Pratam Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Phulsingh Yadav Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Chawad, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶119

42 - Kishan Ram Mandavi S/o Shri Budhram Mandavi Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶120

43 - Jana Lange W/o Shri Rajkumar Lange Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Haradula, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶121

44 - Manrakhan Netam S/o Late Shri Dhansai Netam Aged About 42 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kuralthemli, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶122

45 - Balram Nishad S/o Shri Rohidas Ram Aged About 40 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Haradula, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶123

46 - Rajendra Markam S/o Shri Sundar Singh Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Puri, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶124

11

¶125

47 - Taram S/o Shri Charan Singh Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Puri, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶126

48 - Suresh Kumar Rajak S/o Shri Siyaram Rajak Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pidhapal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶127

49 - Jagmohan Jurro (Died) Through Lrs Anupa Bai W/o Late Jagmohan Jurro Aged About 40 Years R/o Karaiha, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶128

--- Appellants

¶129

Versus

¶130

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Department Of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶131

2 - Secretary Department Of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶132

3 - Commissioner Adim Jati Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikash Vibhag, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶133

4 - District Education Officer Kanker, District North Baster Kanker (C.G.)

¶134

5 - Shiv Prasad Kripal S/o Shri Navalu Ram Aged About 32 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Lohattar, Block Durgukondal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 1)

¶135

6 - Ramashankar Nag S/o Late Ramnath Nag Aged About 50 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Lohattar, Block Durgukondal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 2)

¶136

7 - Kawal Singh Purame W/o Shri Samaru Ram Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Lohattar, Block Durgukondal, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 3)

¶137

12

¶138

8 - Manesh Ram Netam S/o Shri Gadaram Netam Aged About 41 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Surahi, Block Narharpur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 30) 9 - Kaushal Sinha S/o Shri Parmanand Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pandaripani, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 37) 10 - Hemant Kumar S/o Shri Hariram Aged About 43 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karaiha, Block Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 46)

¶139

Respondent(s)

¶140

For Appellants	: Mr.T.K.Jha, Advocate
For Respondent-	: Mr.S.S.Baghel, Government Advocate
State
For Private	: Mr.S.P.Sannat, Advocate
Respondents

¶141

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶142

4.2.2026

¶143

Heard Mr.T.K.Jha, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr.S.S.Baghel, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State and Mr.S.P.Sannat, learned counsel appearing for the private respondents.

¶144

The appellants have filed these writ appeals against the order dated 25.06.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No.5804/2023 by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

¶145

13

¶146

Brief facts necessary for disposal of theses cases are that the appellants have been serving the respondent Department continuously on a daily-wage basis, without any break, with utmost sincerity and devotion for more than ten years. They are working as Peon in various Government Higher Secondary Schools situated in District Kanker, State of Chhattisgarh, as detailed in the cause title. The appellants were appointed as daily wagers on different dates by the respondent Department and have been discharging duties of perennial and regular nature.

¶147

The law relating to appointments in public service, ensuring equal opportunity to all citizens, was authoritatively settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1 . While mandating that regular appointments must be made only through a proper recruitment process, the Hon’ble Supreme Court also directed, as a one-time measure, regularisation of those employees who had completed ten years or more of continuous service as on the date of the judgment, and whose appointments were irregular but not illegal. The said exercise was directed to be completed within six months. In order to give effect to the aforesaid judgment, the State of Chhattisgarh issued a circular dated 05.03.2008, prescribing detailed guidelines and parameters for consideration of cases for regularisation in a uniform manner.

¶148

Despite the clear mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the

¶149

14

¶150

State circular, the respondent State continued the practice of engaging employees on a daily-wage basis for years together without initiating a proper regular recruitment process or considering them for regularisation. The appellants, though inducted after the cut-off date of 10.04.2006, have been continuously retained by the respondents for more than a decade without any break, thereby exploiting their services while denying them regular status. The continuous nature of their service is evident from the service details prepared by the respondent authorities themselves.

¶151

The appellants placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Narendra Kumar Tiwari vs. State of Jharkhand, (2018) 8 SCC 238 . In the said judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while dealing with an identical factual situation concerning the States of Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh both carved out on 15.11.2000 held that the States could not be permitted to continue irregular appointments indefinitely after the decision in Umadevi (supra) . The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that such practice was contrary to the concept of a welfare State and violative of fundamental rights, and directed the State to take a decision regarding regularisation in the spirit of Umadevi (supra). The judgment effectively removed all doubts being raised by the States to deny consideration for regularisation on hyper-technical grounds.

¶152

15

¶153

Having completed more than ten years of continuous service, the appellants made several representations to the concerned authorities seeking regularisation; however, no decision was taken. Subsequently, respondent No.4, vide letter dated 25.03.2021, called for confidential reports and details of movable and immovable properties of the appellants, indicating initiation of the process for considering regularisation. Further, respondent No.3, vide letter dated 21.10.2021, requested respondent No.2 to consider and take a decision regarding regularisation of dailywage employees; however, no effective action followed.

¶154

The appellants were constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court upon receiving reliable information that the posts on which they were working were proposed to be filled through a fresh recruitment drive. Such action would permanently foreclose the appellants’ claim for regularisation, despite their long and continuous service. The appellants submit that as per the State Government’s own regularisation policy and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, they satisfy all eligibility criteria and deserve consideration for regularisation.

¶155

The appellants filed WPS No. 6882/2021 before this Court seeking regularisation. Vide order dated 13.12.2021, this Court directed respondent No.1 to consider and decide the appellants’ representations in accordance with law within three weeks. Despite fresh representations being submitted, respondent No.1

¶156

16

¶157

failed to comply with the order of this Hon’ble Court, compelling the appellants to file Contempt Petition No. 497/2022. On 06.05.2022, respondent No.1 was granted an opportunity to comply with the order dated 13.12.2021. As the order still remained uncomplied with, the appellants were constrained to initiate contempt proceedings again. During the pendency thereof, respondent No.1 issued the impugned order dated 08.05.2023, which was placed before this Court. The contempt petition was disposed of on 28.07.2023, granting liberty to the appellants to challenge the said order.

¶158

Thereafter, the appellants filed WPS No. 5804/2023 challenging the order dated 08.05.2023. The said petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that the matter pertained to State policy, while observing that if any policy for regularisation was framed, the dismissal would not come in the way of the appellants’ claim.

¶159

Earlier, the appellants had filed WA No. 309/2025, which was withdrawn on 09.05.2025 with liberty to file a fresh appeal. This Hon’ble Court imposed costs of ₹5,000/-, which the appellants duly deposited. A copy of the order dated 09.05.2025 and the receipt are filed as Annexure A/2 (Colly) . Hence, these petitions.

¶160

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been continuously serving the respondent Department on a daily-wage basis for more than ten years without any break,

¶161

17

¶162

discharging duties of Peon in Government Higher Secondary Schools in District Kanker. Their services are perennial in nature and indistinguishable from those of regular employees, yet they have been denied regular status despite prolonged exploitation of their labour. It is submitted that while the Constitution Bench in Umadevi (supra) mandated regular recruitment through a proper process, it simultaneously carved out a one-time measure for regularisation of employees who had completed ten years of service and whose appointments were irregular but not illegal. The continued engagement of the appellants for over a decade after the said judgment, without either regularising them or initiating a regular recruitment process earlier, is wholly contrary to the spirit and intent of Umadevi (supra). He further submits that the State of Chhattisgarh itself issued a circular dated 05.03.2008 prescribing detailed guidelines for consideration of regularisation in compliance with Umadevi (supra). However, the respondent authorities have failed to implement the said policy in a fair and uniform manner, thereby acting arbitrarily and discriminatorily. Strong reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Narendra Kumar Tiwari (supra) , wherein the Court categorically held that States carved out in the year 2000, including Chhattisgarh, cannot be permitted to continue irregular appointments indefinitely after Umadevi’ judgment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court condemned such practice as being contrary to the concept of a welfare State and violative of fundamental rights, and

¶163

18

¶164

directed the State to take a conscious decision on regularisation. The ratio squarely applies to the appellants’ case. He also submits that the appellants were inducted after 10.04.2006, yet have been continuously retained for more than a decade without interruption. Such prolonged continuation itself establishes the permanent requirement of the posts and exposes the arbitrary conduct of the respondents in denying regularisation while extracting regular work. He contended that the respondents themselves initiated steps indicative of regularisation by calling for confidential reports and details of movable and immovable properties vide letter dated 25.03.2021. Further, respondent No.3 recommended consideration of regularisation vide letter dated 21.10.2021. These actions demonstrate that the appellants’ cases were found worthy of consideration, yet no final decision was taken. He further contended that despite a clear direction of this Court dated 13.12.2021 to decide the appellants’ representations, the respondent authorities failed to comply, compelling the appellants to initiate contempt proceedings. The impugned order dated 08.05.2023 was passed only to avoid contempt and does not reflect a bona fide or reasoned consideration of the appellants’ claims. He also contended that the appellants were constrained to approach this Court upon learning that the respondents propose to fill up the posts by fresh recruitment, which would permanently extinguish the appellants’ legitimate claim for regularisation. Such action is arbitrary, unfair, and contrary to the principles laid down

¶165

19

¶166

by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He submitted that the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the writ petition by terming the issue as a pure policy matter. Once the State has framed a policy and the law has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, denial of consideration for regularisation becomes justiciable and amenable to judicial review, particularly where arbitrariness and prolonged exploitation are evident. As such, the writ appeals deserve to be allowed and the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge deserves to be set aside. He relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court in the matters of Jaggo v. Union of India & Ors., 2024 INSC 1034, Dharam Singh & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr., 2025 INSC 998 and Bhola Nath v. The State of Jharkhand & Ors., 2026 INSC 99 .

¶167

On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants and submits that appointments of the appellants are purely daily-wage and dehors the rules. The appellants were engaged purely on a daily-wage basis without following any regular recruitment process, without advertisement, and without selection through a competent authority. Such engagements are contractual and temporary in nature and do not confer any legal or vested right to claim regularisation or absorption in public service. It is submitted that the Constitution Bench judgment in Umadevi (supra) clearly mandates that public employment must be made strictly in accordance with the

¶168

20

¶169

constitutional scheme of equality under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitutin of India. The so-called “one-time measure” contemplated therein was limited to those employees who had completed ten years of continuous service as on 10.04.2006. The appellants, admittedly having been appointed after the said cut-off date, are squarely excluded from the ambit of regularisation under Umadevi . Learned State Counsel submits that mere continuation in service for a long period, even if for more than ten years, does not create a right to regularisation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly held that length of service cannot be a ground to bypass the constitutional requirement of regular recruitment. It is submitted that the circular dated 05.03.2008 was issued strictly in compliance with Umadevi’s case and applies only to those dailywage/contractual employees who fulfilled the eligibility conditions as on the cut-off date. Since the appellants were not in service for ten years as on 10.04.2006, they do not fall within the zone of consideration under the said circular. Learned State Counsel submits that in compliance with the order dated 13.12.2021 passed in WPS No. 6882/2021, the competent authority duly considered the appellants’ representations and passed a reasoned order dated 08.05.2023. Merely because the appellants are dissatisfied with the outcome does not render the decision illegal or arbitrary. It is submitted that the issue of regularisation involves financial implications and manpower planning, which fall within the exclusive domain of the State Government. The learned

¶170

21

¶171

Single Judge rightly declined interference, holding that the matter pertains to policy and does not warrant judicial intervention at this stage. He relied upon the judgment of this Court passed in WA No.143 of 2025 (Panchram Rathore v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) , decided on 03.03.2025. As such, the writ appeals deserves to be dismissed.

¶172

We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also went through the records with utmost circumspection.

¶173

The appellants contend that they have been serving continuously on a daily-wage basis for more than ten years and are entitled to regularisation in terms of the one-time measure contemplated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Umadevi (supra). Reliance has also been placed on the subsequent judgment in Narendra Kumar Tiwari (supra) and other judgments including Jaggo (supra), Dharam Singh (supra) and Bhola Nath (supra).

¶174

On the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that the appellants were engaged purely on a daily-wage basis, outside the rules of regular recruitment, and that such engagements are temporary and contractual. The State counsel further submits that the one-time measure for regularisation under Umadevi was restricted to employees who had completed ten years of continuous service as on 10.04.2006. The appellants, admittedly having been appointed after the said cut-off date, cannot claim

¶175

22

¶176

any right to regularisation.

¶177

Upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the appellants were appointed after the cut-off date of 10.04.2006 and therefore, do not fall within the category of employees eligible for regularisation under Umadevi. The circular dated 05.03.2008 issued by the State of Chhattisgarh, which prescribes guidelines for regularisation, also applies only to employees eligible as on the cut-off date. The steps taken by the respondents, including calling for confidential reports or property details of the appellants, were administrative in nature and cannot be construed as conferring any legal or enforceable right to regularisation. The order dated 08.05.2023 passed by the competent authority constitutes a reasoned decision within the policy domain of the State, and mere dissatisfaction by the appellants cannot render the same illegal or arbitrary. Filling up posts through a regular recruitment process is constitutionally mandated to ensure equality of opportunity under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and the appellants cannot claim exemption from this process on the basis of longterm daily-wage engagement.

¶178

As regards the judgments relied upon by the appellants, it is observed that:

¶179

(i) Narendra Kumar Tiwari (supra) dealt with employees who were in service on the cut-off date and the State’s failure to act for decades. The present appellants were inducted after the cut-off

¶180

23

¶181

date and therefore the ratio of the said judgment does not extend to them;

¶182

(ii) The judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jaggo (supra) , Dharam Singh (supra) , and Bhola Nath (supra) do not confer any right for regularisation on employees engaged after the cut-off date and relate to distinct facts involving compliance with court directions for eligible employees.

¶183

From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Single Judge has observed that the regularization of daily wager employee is exclusively within the domain of the executive policy of the State, as such at this juncture, this court cannot interfere in the impugned order as no policy of regularization of Daily wagers employees has been placed on record. The policy Annexure P/3 dated 05.03.2008 issued by the State Government is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that if the State Government frame policy for regularization of daily wagers employee, order dated 08.05.2023 (Annexure P/1) will not come in way of the petitioner or the Respondents to consider for regularization.

¶184

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, perusing the documents annexed with writ petition as also with writ appeals and also considering the finding recorded by learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition, we are of

¶185

24

¶186

the considered opinion that the learned Single Judge has not committed any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. We find no merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants. The learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition and correctly held that the matter falls within the exclusive domain of the State Government’s policy decisions.

¶187

Resultantly, the writ appeals being devoid of merit are liable to be and are hereby dismissed . No order as to cost(s).

¶188

Sd/- Sd/-

¶189

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶190

Bablu

Manoj Kumar Netam v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar Netam v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nand Kishore Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sakun Bai Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Surendar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Smt. Muniya Bai

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Yogesh Choure

The State of Chhattisgarh Vs Jitendra Kumar Sahu