JUDGMENT :

All the petitions being W.P.(C) No.166 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.167 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.168 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.169 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.170 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.171 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.172 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.173 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.174 of 2018, W.P.(C) No.175 of 2018 and W.P.(C) No.221 of 2018 are consolidated for disposal by a common judgment inasmuch as all the petitioners seek benefit under the memorandum No.F.10(2)-FIN(G)/2008(part) dated 21.01.2009 for regularization from the contingent or casual employment as all of them have 10(ten) completed 10(ten) years of service. The petitioners have asserted their initial date of engagement as shown in the table below:

Sl. No. Name of the writ petitioner with writ petition No. Date of engagement as the full time casual worker Date of completion of ten years as full time casual worker

1. Pralay Goswami, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.166 of 2018 01.05.2005 30.04.2015

2. Jiten Singh @ Giten Singha, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.167 of 2018 12.05.2001 11.05.2011

3. Bipan Chakraborty, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.168 of 2018 May, 2003 May, 2013

4. Mantosh Datta, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.169 of 2018 01.12.2003 30.11.2013

5. Tiklu Ch. Dey, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.170 of 2018 08.11.2001 07.11.2011

6. Suman Deb, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.171 of 2018 10.03.2004 09.03.2014

7. Swapan Acharjee, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.172 of 2018 10.03.2004 09.03.2014

8. Swapan Acharjee, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.173 of 2018 14.11.2002 13.11.2012

9. Krishna Debnath, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.174 of 2018 14.11.2002 13.11.2012

10. Badal Chakraborty, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.175 of 2018 January, 2005 January, 2015

11. Sanju Singha, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.221 of 2018 01.04.2006 31.03.2016

2. As all the writ petitioners who were either engaged before 31.03.2003 or after 31.03.2013 have completed the 10 (ten) years of service as the full time casual worker under the respondents and such statement in respect of completion of 10(ten) years has not been contested. Moreover, those facts are borne in the departmental records. The fact of completion of ten years of service as the contingent/casual workers (full time) has not been challenged by the respondents. The petitioners have uniformly urged this court to apply the memorandum dated 21.01.2009 which has laid, inter alia, as under:

“The undersigned is directed to inform that the Government has taken a policy decision to regularize services of full time DRWs/Casual/Contingent workers from the next date of 10 years of service and fulfil the following criterion as per Department wise names and particulars attached herewith:

(i) DRW/Casual/contingent workers who were engaged on a full time basis in different Department with or without concurrence of Finance Department other than Permanent Labourers, Part-time workers, Anganwadi Workers and Helpers, Home Guards, Teachers and Workers engaged under SSA and other Schemes/Programmes, may be considered for regularization as per names attached.

(ii) Recruitment of age as per Recruitment Rules will be deemed to be relaxed for the purpose of this regularization.

(iii) Recruitment of educational qualification as per Recruitment Rules will be deemed as relaxed for regularization under Group-D only. In case of DRW/and Contingent Workers who were appointed under Group-C Category, educational qualification as required under concerned R.R. must be ensured while entertaining their cases for regularization.

(iv) Except age and educational qualification mentioned in point (ii) & (iii) all other criterion as per relevant Recruitment Rules including reservation roster will have to be followed strictly for this process of regularization.

(v) Subject to fulfillment of above conditions, the eligible workers will be provided pay scale in the relevant post on the following day of completion of 10 years of service (without any break) from the date of joining. In the event of re