SITARAM DADSENA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPS/3716/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010149082026

Filing Number

WPS/8602/2026

Filing Date

10-Apr-2026

Registration No

WPS/3716/2026

Registration Date

27-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

REGULARIZATION OF AD-HOC EMPLOYEES ETC. ( 602 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SITARAM DADSENA

    Adv. HARSHAL CHOUHAN,SULABH ARORA,SULABH ARORA, ,AKASH PANDEY,AKASH PANDEY,MAYANK CHANDRAKAR,KESHAV DEWANGAN,KAUSTUBH NANDE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.Principal Chief Conservator of Forest

  3. 3.The Divisional Forest Officer

  4. 4.Forest Range Officer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem SahuView PDF

    The Chhattisgarh High Court disposed of the writ petition by permitting Sitaram Dadsena, employed as a daily-wage Truck Cleaner since 1995 (approximately 30 years of service), to submit a fresh representation for regularization to forest authorities. The court directed respondents to consider the representation within three months, considering his lengthy service and recent Supreme Court rulings emphasizing that states cannot indefinitely engage workers on temporary bases for perennial work, holding regularization as a constitutional obligation under Articles 14, 16, and 21. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 29-Apr-2026

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Additional Registrar(j)

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPS/3716/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Chhattisgarh High Court disposed of the writ petition by permitting Sitaram Dadsena, employed as a daily-wage Truck Cleaner since 1995 (approximately 30 years of service), to submit a fresh representation for regularization to forest authorities. The court directed respondents to consider the representation within three months, considering his lengthy service and recent Supreme Court rulings emphasizing that states cannot indefinitely engage workers on temporary bases for perennial work, holding regularization as a constitutional obligation under Articles 14, 16, and 21. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case