Madhya Pradesh High Court
WRIT PETITION 13175 of 2013 on 1 April 1990
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 23[rd] OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 13175 of 2013
BETWEEN:-
HEMANTRAO AND 16 ORS. S/O RAMCHANDRARAO, AGED ABOUT 411.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 9/16, EWSH RISHI NAGAR, UJJAIN(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
ASHOK S/O SIDDHNATH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION:2.ZILA SAHAKARI KENDRIAYA BANK MARYADIT,BRANCHTARANA,UJJAIN M.P UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)TARANA,UJJAIN M.P UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
MANGUSINGH S/O NAHARSINGH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,3.OCCUPATION: SERVICE MALI MOHALLA, POST RUNIJA, TEHSIL-BARNAGAR, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)BARNAGAR, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
NARESH SHRIVASTAVA S/O MOTI LAL SHRIVASTAVA, AGED ABOUT4.48 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 93,NEAR ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
RAJESH YADAV S/O RATANLAL YADAV, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,5.OCCUPATION: SERVICE 52/EWSG RISHI NAGAR, UJJAIN M.P(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
JAGDISHSINGH S/O BHANWAR SINGH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,6.OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE-MANGROLA, POST CHINTAMANJAWASIYA, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)JAWASIYA, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
7.[ASLAM S/O SAIMAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:]SERVICE 14/21,EWS, VED NAGAR, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)SERVICE 14/21,EWS, VED NAGAR, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
PRAKASH PATIDAR S/O ANOKHILAL PATIDAR, AGED ABOUT 448.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE-KHARSODKALA,POST&TEHSIL BARNAGAR, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)POST&TEHSIL BARNAGAR, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
9.ANIL RATHORE S/O NARAYAN PRASAD RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 48YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 108,BEGAMPURA,UJJAIN M.PYEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 108,BEGAMPURA,UJJAIN M.P
(MADHYA PRADESH)
Page 1 of 4
TARACHAND AHUJA S/O CHETURAM AHUJA, AGED ABOUT 4510.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 44/2 SHASTRI NAGAR STREET NO.2,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
ARUN JAIN S/O BABULAL JAIN , AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,11.OCCUPATION: SERVICE 241,AANGRE KA BADA, OPPOSITE TIWARIGARANGE,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)GARANGE,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
SHAKIL MOHAMMAD S/O SADAR MOHAMMAD, AGED ABOUT 5312.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE IMLIBAGH, TEHSIL-TARANA,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
MAHESH ARYA S/O SURAJMAL ARYA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,13.OCCUPATION: SERVICE MAHAVEER NAGAR, PIPLINAKACHOURAHA, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)CHOURAHA, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
RAJKUMAR GUPTA S/O MATAPRASAD GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 4614.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE ZILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANKMARYADIT, BRANCH GHATIYA, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)MARYADIT, BRANCH GHATIYA, UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
RAMESH KASHYAP S/O PARAMANAND KASHYAP, AGED ABOUT 5015.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 14,BHATGALI, BAHADURGANJUJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
GANPAT SHARMA S/O SHANKARLAL SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 5116.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE VILLAGE-KHEDA KHAJURIYAPOST &TEHSIL MEHIDPUR,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)POST &TEHSIL MEHIDPUR,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
RAMNARAYAN BHADORIYA S/O MARYAD SINGH, AGED ABOUT 5817.YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 9/MT SETHI NAGAR, UJJAIN M.P(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI BALDEEP SINGH GANDHI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. [PRINCIPAL SECRETARY STATE OF M.P. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION]DEPARTMENT AND 2 ORS. GOVT. BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)DEPARTMENT AND 2 ORS. GOVT. BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
COMMISSIONER, COOPERATIVE AND REGISTRAR,COOPERATIVE2.SOCIETIES,BHOPAL M.P VINDHYACHAL BHAWAN,BHOPAL M.P(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
MANAGING DIRECTOR, ZILA SAHAKARI KENDRIYA BANK3.MARYADIT,UJJAIN M.P HAVING ITS HEAD AT 84, TILAK MARG, NAISADAK,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)SADAK,UJJAIN M.P (MADHYA PRADESH)
Page 2 of 4
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI AMIT RAWAL, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This petition coming on for order this day, the court passed thefollowing:
O R D E R
The petitioners have approached this Court seekingregularization into the service. The petitioners are the residents ofDistrict – Ujjain. They were appointed as daily wagers byrespondent No.3 between 01.04.1990 to 22.11.1996 on the post ofPeon and Guard which is a Class – IV post. There is no dispute thatthey are continuously working since the date of initial engagement.02.In light of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the caseof State of Karnataka v/s Uma Devi & Others reported in AIR2006 SC 1806, the State Government issued a Circular dated16.05.2007 directing all the Government Department / Corporation /Local Body to constitute a screening committee for consideration ofthe case of daily rated employee for regularization who are inservice for more than 10 years. Copy of circulars dated 16.05.2007and 06.09.2008 are filed as Annexures-P/2 & P/3. In compliance ofthe aforesaid circulars, respondent No.2 constituted a ScreeningCommittee. The Committee on its meeting convened on 30.07.2009examined the case of the petitioners along with others andrecommended for regularization. Despite the aforesaidrecommendation and availability of vacant posts as per staffingpattern (Annexures-P/7 to P/10), the respondents rejected the claimof the petitioners for regularization for want of vacant post.
03. Similarly placed Class – III employees who were working asdaily wager approached this Court by way of W.P. No.7202 of2011(S). The writ petition was allowed by this Court directing therespondent No.3 / Bank to regularize them into the service. Thepetitioners approached this Court when their claim for regularizationwas rejected.
Page 3 of 4
04. The respondents filed a reply in which they are not disputingthe engagement of the petitioners as daily wagers, their continuouswork since last 10 years and denial of regularization for want ofvacant post. However, in paragraph – 5.9 of the return, therespondents have given the details of vacant posts, according towhich only 16 posts are available out of which 08 posts are reservedfor SC category candidates.
05. This return was filed in the year 2014, now more than 9years have been passed and most of the posts are vacant. Even norecruitment has taken place during pendency of this petition. If 16posts were vacant at that time, at least 16 petitioners could havebeen regularized as per their seniority list but none of the petitionerswere considered for regularization. As per staffing pattern(Annexures-P/7 to P/10), posts were vacant and there is arecommendation of Screening Committee also. Therefore, it isdirected that the petitioners be regularized and taken back into theservice. The entire exercise be completed with a period of 60 daysfrom the date of receipt of certified copy of this order andcompliance report be communicated to this Court.
-5-
With the aforesaid, Writ Petition stands allowed.
Ravi Digitally signed by RAVI PRAKASH Date: 2023.08.23 18:51:47 +05'30'
(VIVEK RUSIA)
J U D G E
Page 4 of 4
Loading citations and judicial treatment…