SHYAM SUNDER RAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Arun Choudhury Versus State Of Jharkhand

(2.) THE petitioner has prayed that the petitioner's services may be regularized who had been working as casual labour as a Jeep Driver since last eight years.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The learned counsel could not demonstrate that the petitioner was ever attend (sic ''attained ?) the status more than a daily casual labour as driver in the respondent's department. The petitioner being a daily wages, he has no right to claim the regularization of his services in the post in which he had worked for a long period. It has been held in Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi judgment, 2006 Vol. -4 SCC page -1 [: 2006(2) JLJR (SC)282] that the persons who had been engaged on the daily wages they come from the back door and such appointments violates the constitutional mandate enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. They have no right to seek the remedy of being regularized and they cannot claim parity with the regularly appointed employees who had been regularly employed under the scheme of the Constitution as enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It was further held when they attend the service they come with open eyes and they know that they have come from back door and they have to go any time from the same door. Such persons cannot claim the same parity with the employees. It has been further held in the Uma Devi (supra) that the daily worker has no legal right to