Himachal Pradesh High Court
Smt. Maili vs State Of Himachal Pradesh Along ... on 13 May, 2022
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq, Sandeep Sharma
.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ON THE 13th DAY OF MAY, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
Between:
r to
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7481 of 2021
SMT. MAILI,
WIFE OF SH. MANI RAM,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND
POST OFFICE MANALI,
TEHSIL MANALI, DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.,
PRESENTLY SERVING AS A
BELDAR UNDER HPPWD DIVISION KATRAIN,
DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.
....PETITIONER
(MR. A.K. GUPTA,
ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF H.P.
THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
(PUBLIC WORKS) WITH HEADQUARTERS
AT SHIMLA, H.P.
2. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF,
::: Downloaded on - 17/05/2022 20:05:57 :::CIS
2
HPPWD WITH HEADQUARTERS AT
.
NIRMAN BHAWAN, SHIMLA-2.
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
HPPWD CIRCLE KULLU, DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.
4 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HPPWD
DIVISION KATRAIN, DISTRICT KULLU, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS
(MR. RITA GOSWAMI, ADDITIONAL
ADVOCATE GENERAL)
Whether approved for reporting?.
This petition coming on for orders this day, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
Sandeep Sharma, passed the following:
ORDER
Petitioner namely, Smt. Maili, who is a Nepali citizen, was
engaged as a daily wage beldar with effect from 1.1.1996 and since then
she had been working continuously with 240 days in each calendar year in
the aforesaid capacity till her regularization in the year, 2018. Since the
petitioner was not granted work charge status after her having completed
eight years service, she has approached this Court in the instant
proceedings filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying
therein for following relief:-
"1. That the circular Annexure P-3 may be held to be
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the
same may be struck down and the respondents may be
ordered to grant work charge status to the petitioner
.
from the date she completed 8 years service, with all
benefits incidental thereof."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while making this Court to
peruse the judgment rendered by Principal Division Bench of this Court in
bunch of petitions i.e. Civil Writ Petition No. 5702 of 2011 titled Dal
Bahdur versus State of Himachal Pradesh along with other connected
matters, contended that his case is squarely covered with the aforesaid
judgment. He also invited attention of this Court to judgment passed by
learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No.5799 of 2014 tilted as Budh
Bahadur versus the State of H.P. and others, wherein similar relief, as
has been prayed in the instant petition, has been granted to the petitioner
in that case.
3. Aforesaid prayer made on behalf of the petitioner has been
resisted on behalf of the respondent-department by learned Additional
Advocate General on the ground that judgment rendered by Division
Bench of this Court in Dal Bahadur versus State of Himachal Pradesh
alongwith other connected matters and judgment dated 27.04.2012
passed in Shiv Kumari versus State of Himachal Pradesh alongwith
other connected matters, have not attained finality because department
has laid challenge to the same by way of SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme
.
Court.
4. However, careful perusal of material made available to this
Court clearly reveals that SLP having been filed by the respondent-State
against the judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Dal
Bahadur case (supra) stands dismissed. Having taken note of dismissal of
SLP filed by the respondent-State in Dal Bahadur case, learned Single
Judge while allowing the writ petition bearing CWP No.5799 of 2014 titled
as Budh Bahadur versus the State of HP and others, directed the
respondent-State to confer work charge status upon the petitioner on his
having completed eight years of uninterrupted service and thereafter
regularize the service of the petitioner in accordance with law upon
availability of vacancies.
5. Learned Additional Advocate General was unable to dispute
that larger issue as to whether petitioner, who is not Indian citizen, is
entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction of Court of India stands duly
adjudicated by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Learned Additional Advocate
General was also unable to dispute that relief claimed by the petitioner in
the instant proceedings have been already extended to similar situate
Nepalee employees.
6. Division Bench of this Court while passing judgment dated
.
9.11.2011 in Dal Bahadur case (supra) specifically took note of judgment
rendered by this Court in case tilted as Man Singh versus State of
Himachal Pradesh, CWP No.1594 of 2008, decided on 27.7.2009, wherein
it specifically took note of resolution passed by Central Government on
1.3.1977, the office memorandum dated 10.5.1978 and letter dated
16.7.2009 addressed by the Secretary (Agriculture) to the Government of
Himachal Pradesh to the Director of Agriculture, whereby it was laid down
that as far as Nepalese citizens are concerned, only eligibility certificates
are required. As per aforesaid judgment, if Napalese citizens are able to
furnish eligibility certificates they are also required to be granted benefit in
terms of policy framed by Government of Himachal Pradesh from time to
time with regard to conferment of work charge status and thereafter
regularization. Since aforesaid judgment rendered by Principal Division
Bench has already attained finality, the petitioner in the case at hand
being similar situate person is also entitled for similar benefit.
7. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is
allowed and the respondents are directed to confer work charge status
upon the petitioner from the date she completed eight years service with
all benefits incidental thereto. Since the petitioner has approached this
Court in the instant proceedings in the year 2021, she is held entitled to
.
consequential benefits from the date three years prior to filing of the
petition. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of
( Mohammad Rafiq ),
Chief Justice
13th May, 2022
manjit
r to ( Sandeep Sharma ),
Judge
