Dismissed

Chaturbhuj Lohar v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC5 Aug 2022CW/4937/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a writ petition filed by a Chowkidar claiming regularization and regular pay. The High Court held that since the petitioner was engaged through a placement agency on a contractual basis, he is not entitled to regularization over permanent employees.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; pending applications also dismissed as petitioner was engaged via placement agency on contractual basis.

Chaturbhuj Lohar Vs State and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4937/2000

¶3

Chaturbhuj Lohar S/o Shri Bardhi Lal, aged about 36 years, Resident Of Village Laxmipura, Post Laxmipura, District Bundi, Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan Through The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶7

The Director, Social Welfare Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur

¶8

The District Probation And Social Welfare Officer, District Bundi.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nadeem Mazahir, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nalin G. Narain, AGC

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order

¶12

05/08/2022

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was appointed as Chowkidar on 01.09.1995 at the wage of Rs. 600/- per month. He has submitted that petitioner is discharging similar functions as are being discharged by regular Class-IV employees and therefore, he is entitled for regularization as he has been working continuously, not unlike permanent employees. However, he is only paid daily wages and not regular pay. In light of above, he has prayed for the following:-

¶14

“i) By an appropriate writ, direction or order the respondents be kindly directed to make the petitioner regular/permanent on Class-IV post and provide her the prescribed regular pay scale of the said post from 01.09.1995 i.e. the date of the initial appointment on Class-IV post on which he has been performing duties and functions continuously like permanent employees who perform such duties and functions.

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CW-4937/2000]

¶17

ii) That by an appropriate writ, direction or order the respondents be also directed to govern the service conditions of the petitioner on the same lines as other similarly situated permanent Class-IV employees are being governed.

¶18

iii) That any other appropriate relief to which the petitioner is found entitled be also granted.

¶19

iv) That the writ petition be kindly allowed with costs.”

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Coordinate Bench of this Court in SBCWP No. 1341/2001 titled as Smt. Radha Bai Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors .

¶21

Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that Department constituted a Mess Committee which manages the mess affairs of the hostel, including engagement of the part time/temporary personnel to render the said functions. At present, petitioner is an employee of placement agency on contractual basis and is not entitled for regularization.

¶22

Heard the arguments advanced by both the sides, scanned the record and considered the judgment cited at Bar. Placing reliance on the fact that petitioner was engaged through the placement agency on contractual basis and placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in similar circumstances in Civil Appeal No. 10502-10505/2011 titled as K. K. Suresh & Anr. Etc. Vs. Food Corporation of India & Ors. Etc. , this court is of the view that this writ petition is liable to be dismissed as, admittedly, petitioner was engaged through placement agency on contractual basis.

¶23

Accordingly, present writ petition is dismissed. All pending applications also stand dismissed.

¶24

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶25

Pooja /4

Chaturbhuj Lohar v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chaturbhuj Lohar v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Sharma S/O Shri Basant Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Kiran @ Dabali W/O Ramswaroop @ Chandmal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shriram S/O Shri Kishanlal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Bhanwar Lal Meharshi Vs the Judge Labour Court NO.2 Ja

Shri Mahesh Kumar S/O Shreekishan Ji Vs Shri Kalu Ali S/O Nawab Ali

Bhairuram Gurjar Son of Shri Bhagwan Sahay Gurjar, Vs Shri Abhay Kumar Principal Secretary