Years vs Unknown
2022 Latest Caselaw 3697 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
                        ON THE 23rd DAY OF MAY, 2022
                                  BEFORE




                                                               .
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR





                   EXECUTION PETITON No. 6 OF 2022
Between:-





    SH. PARMA RAM SON OF SHR. INDER
    SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAMANA,
    P.O. BIRTUNGAL, TEHSIL AND DISTT.
    MANDI, H.P. EX. MASON, I&PH DIVISION
    NO. 2, MANDI, DISTT. MANDI, H.P. AGE 67





    YEARS.                                                           ...PETITIONER

    (BY SH. ABHENDRA GUPTA, ADVOCATE.)

    AND

1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH THE

   PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (I&PH) WITH
   HEADQUARTERS AT SHIMLA, H.P.

2. THE ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF, I&PH WITH
   HEADQUARTERS AT JAL SHAKTI



   BHAWAN, TUTIKANDI, SHIMLA, H.P.

3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, I&PH




   CIRCLE SUNDERNAGAR, DISTT. MANDI,
   H.P.





4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, I&PH
   DIVISION NO. 2, MANDI, DISTT. MANDI,
   H.P.                                                         ...RESPONDENTS





    (BY MS.DIVYA SOOD, DEPUTY
    ADVOCATE GENERAL.)

    Whether approved for reporting?

             This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court
passed the following:
                            ORDER

Present Execution Petition has been field for executing

order dated 13.11.2018 passed in OA (M) No. 835 of 2018, titled Parma

Ram Vs. State of H.P. & others. OA (M) No. 835 of 2018 was filed by

the petitioner seeking direction to respondents to grant work-charged

status on completion of 8 years service with all benefits incidental

thereto.

2. Petitioner had claimed his right on the basis of judgment

passed in CWPOA No. 412 of 2016 Ashwani Kumar Vs. The State of

Himachal Pradesh and others, which was affirmed by this High Court

.

vide judgment dated 10.5.2018 passed in CWP No. 3111 of 2016, titled

as State of H.P. and others Vs. Sh. Ashwani Kumar.

3. Response to the petition has been filed alongwith copy of

Office Order dated 11.11.2021, wherein it is stated that though case of

the petitioner was not covered under Ashwani Kumar's judgment,

however, he has been granted work-charged status w.e.f. 1.1.2002 on

completion of 8 years by him on the basis of judgment dated 28.7.2010

passed in CWP No. 2735 of 2010, titled Rakesh Kumar Vs. State of H.P.

4. The grievance of the petitioner stands redressed, though

not on the basis of Ashwani Kumar's case, but on the basis of Rakesh

Kumar's case, but fact remains that petitioner has been conferred work-

charged status on completion of 8 years. Therefore, nothing services to

be adjudicated in present petition. Accordingly, the petition stands

disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy, if

any grievance still survives to be redressed.

                                                  (Vivek Singh Thakur),
     rd
23 May, 2022                                             Judge.
          (Keshav)