STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. UMENDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ petitions viz. Writ Petition (L) Nos. 4374 & 4377 of 2010, involve common facts and question of law, thus, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioner/State is as under:

(3.) Mr. Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate-General appearing for the State/petitioners, submits that in both the cases, the respondent employees were appointed as daily wagers and thus, the respondents are not entitled to any relief as granting reinstatement on account of non-compliance of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act, 1947 amounts to regularizing the services of the respondents. Their appointment was on daily wages basis, not in accordance with the constitutional scheme of employment. Mr. Thakur relies on the decisions of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, Uttar Pradesh. v. Anil Kumar Mishra & others, 2005 5 SCC 122, Senior Superintendent Telegraph (Taffic), Bhopal v. Santosh Kumar Seal & others, 2010 6 SCC 773.