Chattisgarh High Court
Nand Kumar Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh 70 Wps/432/2019 ... on 22 January, 2019
Author: P. Sam Koshy
Bench: P. Sam Koshy
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 411 of 2019
Nand Kumar Tiwari S/o Late Mangal Prasad Tiwari Aged About 54 Years
Presently Working As Sub Engineer In The Office Of Executive Engineer,
P. W. D. Division No. 2 (Vidhansabha Division) Raipur, R/o C-328, Maitri
Nagar (Sundar Nagar), Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department
Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Engineer In Chief Public Works Department Nirman Bhawan, Raipur,
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Chief Engineer Public Works Department Raipur, District Raipur,
Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4. Executive Engineer P. W. D. Division No. 2 (Vidhansabha Division),
Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate For State : Ms. Astha Shukla, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 22/01/2019
1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Sub Engineer on ad hoc daily wage basis on 22.12.1986 against the vacant post. The services of the petitioner were continued with artificial break of two or three days in service and worked continuously till the date of his regularization. The petitioner was given the benefits of annual increments.
2. The similarly situated employees have approached the State Administrative Tribunal (for short ("SAT") in Original Application No. 1979/91 (Satish Kumar Mandloi Vs. State of M.P. And another) praying for similar relief as sought for in this petition. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this case may also be disposed off in the same terms and conditions. 2
3. Learned counsel for the State in the light of the order of the SAT as aforestated, submits that after verifying the facts of the case, petitioner's case shall be considered.
4. In view of the foregoing and categorical statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the State, this petition is allowed in the same terms i.e. if the Committee finds the petitioner suitable for the post in all respect, he shall be regularized on the post held by him and shall also pay him salary on regular scale. He shall be entitled to salary for the dates on break in service. His seniority shall be counted from the date of his initial appointment.
5. No costs.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit