Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Selja Shriraj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 February, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:9229
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1377 of 2025
1 - Smt. Selja Shriraj W/o Shiv Aged About 35 Years Occupation-
Rasoiya/danik Majdor Sas.Po.Mai. Anusuchit Jati Kanya Chatravash
Akaltra Niwasi- Gram-Akaltra, Jila- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
2 - Shivshankar Suryavanshi S/o Chhaturam Suryavanshi Aged About 40
Years Occupation- Bhratya/danik Majdor, Sas. Pri.Mai. Adivashi Balak
Digitally
signed by
SHOAIB
SHOAIB
ANWAR Chatravash-Akaltra Niwasi- Gram- Akaltra, Jila- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
ANWAR Date:
2025.02.24
20:01:21
... Petitioner(s)
+0530
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Sachiv, Aadim Jati Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikas
Vibhag, Mantralaya Nawa Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Aayukt Adim Jati Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikas Raipur, Jila Raipur,
(C.G.)
2
3 - Sahayak Aayukt Adivashi Vikas Vibhag Janjgir Champa Jila Janjgir-
Chmapa (C.G.)
4 - Collector Jila- Janjgir-Champa C.G.
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Abdul Moin Khan, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri S.S. Choubey, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 21.02.2025
1. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant case is that she has been discontinued from the service without following the due process of law.
2. According to the counsel for petitioner, she was working as daily wage employee under the respondents and suddenly, the services of the petitioner was discontinued.
3. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instruction to state that there is availability of work in the department and they are also in need of daily wage employees, however, ignoring the claim of petitioner for said work they are appointing third persons against the said post.
4. The only prayer that the petitioner make at this juncture is that, if at all, if the respondents intend to engage daily wage workers, let the petitioner be given some preferential right and to be continued instead of appointing fresh personnel. The respondents be directed 3 to take work from the petitioner considering her experience and the length of service rendered by her.
5. Given the said grievance that the petitioner has, the writ petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the respondent authorities to look into the grievance of petitioner and try to redress the same as far as possible by reengaging the petitioner, if at all if the State or the respondents intend to get work from the daily wage workers. Under such circumstances, the petitioner be given due weightage for the services that she had already rendered in the past.
6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib