At, High Court of Bihar
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NARAYAN ROY
For the Appearing Parties: Jitendra Kumar Rai, Shashi Bhushan Singh, Advocates.
NARAYAN ROY, J.
(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) Substantially, the petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to regular
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
ise his services on the post of Rajaswa Sangrahak in the Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has tried to impress upon the Court that though the petitioner was engaged to work seasonwise, he is entitled to be regularised as per the policy decision taken by the State of Bihar, as contained in Annexure 4 dated 2.5.1992.
(4.) It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been employed on daily wages against seasonal post and he was required to work only during a particular season in a year and not throughout the year.
(5.) Owing to the nature of engagement of the petitioner, in my opinion, it would not be appropriate for this Court to direct the respondent authorities to regularise his services when there is no need of permanent employees.
(6.) In the counter affidavit, it is stated that as per the policy decision of the State Government dated 2.5.1992 the petitioner also applied for regularisation of his services, but, since he was junior his case was not considered.
(7.) Be that as it may in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, as referred to above, no interference is required from this end.
(8.) This application is, accordingly, dismissed. Before I part with this order, it is observed that the petitioner may seek his remedy internally in accordance with law