Raj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court CWJC No.14245 of 2012 (2) dt.30-08-2012 Their association filed writ applications. Relegated back to the authorities, they achieved no success. The petitioners submit that they were all along being considered for absorption. On

02.12.1991, directions were given to prepare a panel for appointment on Class-IV in which preference was given on basis of Seniority to such daily wages. Similar directions were issued on

11.08.1992. Others similarly situated approached this Court in writ applications disposed on 29.02.1996 with directions to consider their cases. Similar directions were given on 04.03.2004 in another writ application. A provisional panel was prepared on 03.10.2004. The aggrieved moved this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 13634 of 2005. On 28.04.2011 the Court directed the District Magistrate to consider for appointment in accordance with qualifications, Seniority and availability of the post. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that if the petitioners were included in earlier panels, directions have been issued by the Court from time to time, the failure of the respondents to comply the same by providing them appointment cannot operate to their prejudice on the ground that they may have become over age in the meantime. Reliance is placed on an instruction dated 25.04.1997 to submit that age was an irrelevant issue and the consideration had to be done first with regard to Patna High Court CWJC No.14245 of 2012 (2) dt.30-08-2012 those with the maximum age. Counsel for the State has opposed the application submitting that if the petitioners have become over age, they have no right to be considered. The law with regard to claims for regularization by daily wagers under went a paradigm shift with the judgment in (2006) 4 SCC 1 (Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi) delivered on 10.04.2006. Paragraph-43 of the judgment laid down that a daily wagers hold no post and the question of their regularization does not arise. Notwithstanding the same, directions were being issued by Courts to consider such daily wagers also for regularization in terms of the discussion contained in paragraph-53 of the judgment as a one time measure. This led to the Supreme