Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 148 HP
Judgement Date : 7 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
.
ON THE 7th DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.135 of 2022
Between:-
VIKAS KUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O LATE SH. KULDEEP SINGH,
R/O VPO KATIC, TUTU, TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT SHIMLA, HIMACHAL PRADESH,
PRESENTLY POSTED AS CONDUCTOR
IN DHALLI, LOCAL UNIT-2, SHIMLA-12, H.P.
......PETITIONER
(BY MR. DHEERAJ KANWAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
HIMACHAL PRADESH ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION, HRTC, HEAD OFFICE,
SHIMLA-1, THROUGH ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR
......RESPONDENT
(BY MR. SHYAM SINGH CHAUHAN,
ADVOCATE)
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:35:13 :::CIS
-2-
This petition coming on for admission this day,
.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq, passed the following:
ORDER
Notice. Mr. Shyam Singh Chauhan, learned
Standing Counsel, appears and accepts service of notice on
behalf of the sole respondent.
2. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner-Vikas
Kumar, inter alia, with the prayer that the respondent-
Himachal Road Transport Corporation (in short 'HRTC') may be
directed to treat the petitioner as having been appointed on
the post of Conductor on regular basis with effect from
9th July, 2007, with all consequential benefits and accordingly
modify the order of appointment dated 9th July, 2007,
Annexure P-1, as well as order of regularization dated
06.08.2014, Annexure P-3.
3. The petitioner's father was working with the
respondent-HRTC on the post of Conductor on regular basis.
While so working, he died in harness in the year, 2000. The
petitioner applied for compassionate appointment to the
respondent-HRTC, who vide order dated 9th July, 2007 was
.
appointed as Conductor, though on contract basis, but his
appointment was described as one of the compassionate
appointments. Eventually, the petitioner was regularized after
seven years, vide order dated 16th July, 2014.
4. It is contended that some of similarly situated
employees of the respondent-HRTC, who were appointed on
compassionate ground, on contract basis, approached this
Court raising the grievance that their initial appointment
should have been made on regular basis. The learned Single
Judge of this Court in CWP No.2570 of 2013, titled as Lekh Ram
Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation, vide judgment
dated 29th October, 2014, allowed the writ petition and
directed that the petitioner in that case would be treated on
regular basis from the date of his initial appointment. Several
other similar writ petitions were also allowed. In all these
matters, Letters Patent Appeals were filed before the Division
Bench of this Court and the leading judgment was rendered in
LPA No.42 of 2015, titled as Himachal Road Transport
Corporation Versus Lekh Ram, on 27th February, 2016,
.
whereby, eight identical appeals were decided in the
following terms:-
"5. In view of above discussion, all the Letters Patent Appeals are disposed of by directing the writ respondents to examine the cases of
the writ petitioners in light of the decision of this Court in Surinder Kumar's case supra and the observations made herein above, and make a
decision within a period of six weeks from
today. Pending CMPs, if any, also stand disposed of."
5. The respondent-HRTC approached the Hon'ble
Supreme Court by filing Civil Appeal Nos.1557-1564 of 2019
(arising out of SLP(C) Nos.16158-16165/2016), titled as
Himachal Road Transport Corporation Versus Lekh Ram etc.
etc., which was disposed of vide judgement dated
8th February, 2019, in the following terms:-
"In this view of the matter, it would be appropriate to order and direct that each of the eight employees to whom these appeals relate would be entitled to the benefit of all
the regular terms and conditions of service
.
with effect from the initial dates of their
appointment on contractual terms, as indicated in the chart extracted above. The
above period of service shall also be reckoned for seniority and for terminal benefits as and when they fall due. Arrears of salary payable
to the respondents on this basis shall be computed and paid over within two months from the date of this order.
The appeals shall stand disposed of in
these terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs."
6, In view of the above, even though the learned
counsel for the respondent-HRTC prays for time to seek
instructions and file reply, but, in the facts of the case, we do
not deem it necessary to require the respondent to file reply
and, therefore, dispose of the writ petition, requiring the
respondent to examine the case of the petitioner in the light
of the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
aforementioned and if it is found that facts of the case of the
petitioner are identical to others, who have been granted the
benefit of regular appointment from their initial appointment
.
on contractual terms, the same benefits be extended to the
petitioner by passing appropriate order, within a period of
three months from the date a copy of this order is produced
by the petitioner before the said authority.
7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall
also stand disposed of.
(Mohammad Rafiq)
Chief Justice
(Jyotsna Rewal Dua)
January 07, 2022 Judge
(Bhardwaj/PK)
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!