Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1302 (PAT)

Bipin Kumar Verma v. State Of Bihar

2003-12-17

NARAYAN ROY

body2003
Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Since both these writ applications involve common questions of facts and law, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this order. 3. Grievances of the petitioners are that though they have been empanelled as daily wage earners under the respondent concerned in between 1979 to 1984, they are not being regularised on Class IV posts even though they are working under the respondents till date. It is the further grievance of the petitioner that many of the persons shown juniors to them have been regularised, but the cases of the petitioners have not been considered for the reasons best known to the respondent authorities. 4. Counter affidavit, supplementary counter affidavit and also reply to the counter affidavit have been filed on behalf of the State. In sum and substance, according to the case of the respondents, it appears that the panel showing seniority and juniority of the daily rated workers since were not available before the authorities, it would be difficult to say as to whether any junior to the petitioners has been regularised. However, it is also manifest from the affidavits of the State that some of the daily rated workers like the petitioners have been regularised. An affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the State today, wherein it is stated precisely that daily wages labourers have got no seniority list either at the zonal level or the Department, therefore, the allegation made by the petitioners that some of the daily wages workers have been regularised earlier, who are said to be juniors to the petitioners, is not correct. 5. In specific terms, it is not denied by the respondent State that some of the persons shown below to the petitioners in the panel have been regularised. 6. 5. In specific terms, it is not denied by the respondent State that some of the persons shown below to the petitioners in the panel have been regularised. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the facts that the petitioners have continued to work on daily wages for the last 20 years, they should be considered for their regularisation in accordance with law keeping in view the fact that some persons either senior or junior to the petitioners shown in the panel have been regularised and as such, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for their regularisation on Class IV posts in accordance with law and in case, it is found that some of the juniors, who were engaged subsequent to the petitioners on daily wages have been regularised, the petitioners will also be regularised in the same manner by the authorities concerned. However, this exercise must be completed by the respondents not later than a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 7. With the direction and observation aforesaid, these applications are disposed of. 8. Before I part with this order, I would like to observe that in case the petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 9630 of 1998 are getting the minimum scale, they will get the same till disposal of the matter of regularisation in the Department concerned.