AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.—According to the counsel for the petitioners, petitioner James Kandulna of W.P. (S) No. 310 of 2002 is working on daily wage since 1983 under the D.F.O., Kolhan State Trading Division, Chaibasa; whereas petitioners John Kandeyang (W.P.S, 348/02) and Anand Nayak (W.P.S. 311/02), are working on daily wage since 1984 and 1982 respectively, under the D.F.O.. Saranda State Trading Division, Chaibasa, whereas petitioner Ram Pratap Bhanj (W.P.S. 319/02) is working on daily wage since 1981, under the D.F.O.. Saranda Division (Territorial). Chaibasa.
It is stated that a number of persons similarly situated including Md. Irfan have been regularised in the services, as per guidelines issued by the State, vide Resolution No. 5940 dated 18th June. 1993.
From the order passed by this Court in the case of Guru Chanran Mahto v. State of Jharkhand and others. W.P. (S) No. 5532 of 2001, disposed of on 23rd November. 2001 with other analogous cases, it appears that this Court gave liberty to others to bring to the notice of the competent authority the guidelines issued by the State, vide Resolution No. 5940 dated 18th June, 1993 for regular appointment against vacant posts.
Following the decision aforesaid, the present petitioners are also given liberty to move before the competent authority. If it is found that the petitioners who are working on daily wage since prior to 1st August, 1985 and are entitled for regular appointment, as per State Government''s Resolution No. 5940 dated 18th June, 1993 and are similarly situated like Md. Irfan, petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 2840/99(R), the case of the petitioners be also considered for regular appointment against appropriate vacant posts, if any, in accordance with law, within six months from the date of receipt of representation.
The respondents are expected to follow the total selection procedure by placing the matter before an appropriate Selection Committee.
If the respondents reject the claim of one or other petitioner, for one or other ground, will forward the reason to such petitioner(s) within the aforesaid period of six months.
It may be mentioned that this Court has not determined the claim on merit.
All the writ petitions stand disposed of.