Ram Charan v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

legal and not irregular, therefore, there was no question of consideration of new representation.

3. Heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and perused the record.

4. Perusal of the record reflects that coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ashok Kumar Bichail (supra) while making reference to aforesaid two decisions of Apex Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar (supra) and Jaggo (supra) has issued following directions to State Government:

"21. If the arguments of learned Deputy Advocate General are taken note off that Judgment of Uma Devi is holding the field, then the policy is already framed by the State Government in the light of Uma Devi (supra). Respondents have already carried out a drive considering cases of daily rated employees those who have completed more than 10 years in service. In light of the policy framed by the State Government, whether there is a consideration of the case of the petitioners or not is not reflected from the records. It is pointed out that the petitioners have already completed more than 20-25 years of service in the department. They have already been extended the benefit of the Viniyamitikaran Policy dated 07.10.2016 meaning thereby these employees cannot be thrown out from the zone of consideration and regularization only on the ground that their initial appointments were illegal appointments because the authority themself has considered the cases of some of employees and has granted the benefit of Viniyamitikaran Policy to them.

22. Considering the aforesaid, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the Chief Secretary of the State of Madhya Pradesh to take immediate steps for formation of a policy for considering the cases of all the daily rated employees who have served for more than 10 years in various departments and to scrutinize their cases for regularization. A duly constituted committee is directed to consider the case of all the daily rated employees and examine their cases in the light of directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Uma Devi (supra).

23. It is also made clear that, if after scrutiny of the cases of the daily rated employees on earlier occasion the authorities have arrived at a conclusion that the appointment of daily rated employee was illegal appointment, but despite

2

(MANINDER S. BHATTI)

JUDGE

of the same the authorities have permitted them to continue in the department for more than 10 years, after the decision taken by the authorities, then their cases should not be thrown out from zone of consideration for regularization only on the ground that their initial appointment was illegal. The said direction is given considering the fact that the authority knowing well that there are illegal appointments, permitted daily rated employees to continue in the department for more than 10 years without taking any action for termination or removal of their service from the department.

24. As the Government has already considered the judgment passed by the Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court the case of Uma Devi (supra) and has framed the policy for considering the cases of the daily rated employees who have worked for more than 10 years in the department coupled with the fact that the employees have continued in service in the the departments for more than two decades as well as the fact that the judgment passed in the case of Uma Devi (supra) was in the year 2006 and recently in the year 2024 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has pronounced the judgment in the case of Jaggo (supra), therefore, in all fairness the State Government should consider the cases of all such daily rated employees who have completed 10 years of service in the light of judgment passed earlier in the case of Uma Devi (supra) with slight modifications, if required."

5. In view of the aforesaid, in the considered view of this Court, the case of petitioners is also required to be considered. Accordingly, impugned order dated 04.08.2016 (Annexure P/1) stands quashed. The respondents are directed to take decision on the claim of petitioners for regularization in terms of order passed by coordinate Bench in the case of Ashok Kumar Bichail (supra) within a period of 90 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

6. With the aforesaid, the petition stands allowed. vc

3