Vivek Rusia, J.

1. The appellants - State of Madhya Pradesh and Others have filed the present appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 against the order dated 08.01.2024 whereby Writ Petition No.7319/2006 (Kailash Kumar Soni Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others) has been allowed by the Writ Court.

2. Earlier, the appellants filed a Writ Appeal No.2238/2024 against the aforesaid order dated 08.01.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.7316/2006 (Mithoo Lal Kanoje Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others) which has been dismissed vide order dated 14.08.2025 on the ground of delay and latches. However, the said order has been challenged by the State Government by way of Special Leave Petition No.20585/2026.

3. So far as the case on merits of the respondent is concerned, he was initially appointed on a contingency basis as Daily Wager on 11.07.1990. Thereafter, he was regularised vide order dated 04.01.1997 under the direction issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh on 15.12.1992. Before regularisation, the cases of all the similarly placed Daily-Rated employees were examined by the Committee constituted in pursuance of the circular dated 15.12.1992.

4. Later on, the State Government issued a general circular dated 31.03.2000 in respect of the removal of all the Daily-Rated employees, which resulted in the de-regularisation of the respondent/petitioner.

5. The Writ Court has allowed the writ petition by observing that the order dated 04.01.1997 has never been withdrawn or cancelled by the State Government. Therefore, the respondent/petitioner is entitled to the benefit of regularisation on 04.01.1997. The present Writ Appeal is filed only on the ground that, in view of the law laid down in the case of "State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi, [(2006) 4 SCC 1]", it was held that the writ petitioner was inducted as a Daily-Rated employee without following the due process of law. Therefore, such an illegal appointment could not have been regularised.

6. Recently, the Apex Court in the case of the " State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Shyam Sundar Yadav", SLP No. 25609/2018, has dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh, observing as under:-

          "5. It is true that an employee engaged on daily wages has no legally vested right to seek regularisation of his services. However, if the competent authority takes a policy decision within the permissible framework, its benefit must be extended to all those who fall within the parameters of such a policy. Authorities cannot be permitted to pick and choose in such circumstances.

          6. The fact that respondent No.1 has worked as a daily wager from 2005 to 2009 is not in dispute. The eligibility for the post he holds has also not been controverted. The fact that he initially entered through the process in conformity with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution is also not a serious issue. That being so, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court directing the petitioners to confer the status of a regular employee on respondent No.1.

          7. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

          8. The petitioners are directed to do the needful and grant all the benefits, including arrears of pay and seniority, to respondent No.1 from the due date."

7. Shri Prateek Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent, submits that in compliance of order dated 08.01.2024 passed by the Writ Court in Writ Petition No.7136/2006, Mithoo Lal Kanoje (supra) , the respondents therein have paid total arrears of Rs.29,24,309/- (Provident Fund of Rs.2,19,348/- and Insurance Scheme of Rs.71,856/-).

8. In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed.