RONGAN MUKHOPADHYAY,J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Rajesh Lala, learned counsel for the Ranchi Municipal Corporation and Mr. Yogendra Prasad, learned J.C. to S.C.I for the State.
(2.) The petitioners in this writ application has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service as they were discharging their duties as daily wagers. A further prayer has been made to forth with regularise the petitioners in service under the regular establishment in view of the circular of the respondent-Urban Development Department on the ground that several other daily wager have already been regularised. A prayer has also been made to release the entire consequential benefits from the date of initial appointment after regularising the services of the petitioners.
(3.) The factual aspect reveals that the petitioners had joined their services as daily wager in Ranchi Municipal Corporation. It is the case of the petitioners that they have been assigned various duties which they have diligently done and they have discharged their duties against vacant and sanctioned post which were perennial in nature. In view of the judgment in the case of State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi, 2006 (3) JCR 36 (SC) , the Urban Development Department which is the Nodal Department of other local bodies issued circular on 16.5.2011 directing the legal bodies to regularise the service of daily wagers under the regular establishment in accordance with law based on the guidelines by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. After issuance of circular dated 16.5.2011, the petitioners demanded their regularisation, but instead they have been stopped from discharging their duties w.e.f. 20.6.2011. It is the case of the petitioners that the persons who had joined along with the petitioners have already been regularised by virtue of office order No. 359 dated 7.2.1994, but the petitioners have been discriminated against. Representations have been submitted, but of no avail.;