S. N. Pathak, J. - (1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the order dated 08.11.2016 (Annexure-12) , whereby and whereunder, the case of the petitioner for regularization has been rejected in view of policy decision of the State Government dated, 13.02.2015.
(2.) The factual exposition as has been delineated in the writ petition is that the petitioner was appointed as Path Belan Chalak on the daily wages by the Assistant Engineer (Respondent No.5) and the same was approved by the Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Singhbhum Division, Chaibasa vide Memo NO. 851 dated 12.09.1983. The services of the petitioner was extended from time to time by the Assistant Engineer with the approval of Executive Engineer (Respondent No.4) by issuance of various letters in the years, 1984 and 1985. Thereafter, the petitioner was adjusted against the regular vacancy of the Path Belan Chalak and was regularly being paid the salary/wages by the respondents. In the year, 2004, the State Government come out with a policy decision in which the workers, who had completed 240 days before 01.08.1985, for appointment in regular establishment. Pursuant thereto, the name of the petitioner was sent for consideration and name of the petitioner was placed at Sr. No. 3. Though the case of the petitioner was recommended for regularization but the same was never considered.
(3.) It is the specific case of the petitioner that he was working on a sanctioned and vacant post without any break in the service and was getting regular wages up to the year, 2008 and thereafter, denied the minimum wages. On 01.09.2011, the petitioner was removed from the services vide letter dated 25.08.2011, which was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 29.08.2011 on the ground that his appointment was not in accordance with law rather it was totally illegal appointment as no documents pertaining to his appointment was available in the department. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner moved before this Court in W.P.(S) No. 6730 of 2011, the same was disposed vide order dated 24.11.2014 with a direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka & Ors. Vs. Uma Devi & ors., 2006 4 SCC 1 and further directed the petitioner to give appropriate representation before the competent authority, who was directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner.;