Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ramesh Chand Tangrik vs H.P. State Forest Corporation & Others on 22 July, 2024
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
( 2024:HHC:5768 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWPOA No. 7434 of 2019 & 7449 of
.
2019
Date of decision: 22.7.2024
1. CWPOA No. 7434 of 2019
Ramesh Chand Tangrik. ...Petitioner.
Versus
H.P. State Forest Corporation & others. ...Respondents.
2. CWPOA No. 7449 of 2019
Bhag Mall
r to
Versus
...Petitioner
H.P. State Forest Corporation & others ....Respondents.
Corum
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner(s): Mr.Devender Sharma, Advocate, vice
Mr.C.N. Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr.D.S. Kainthla, Advocate, for respondents
No. 1 and 2-HPSFC.
Mr.Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with
Mr.Vishav Deep Sharma, Additional
Advocate General, for respondents No. 3
and 4-State.
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)
Petitioners have approached this Court seeking following main
reliefs:-
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes
2 ( 2024:HHC:5768 )
CWPOA Nos. 7434 & 7449 of 2019
"i. That the respondent department may kindly be directed to consider
the case of the applicant for Regularization, after completion of 8
.
years of regular daily wage service in terms of the policy framed by
the Government which has been adopted by the respondents also
with all consequential benefits.
ii. In alternative the respondents department may kindly be directed to
grant same treatment w.r.t. the regularization of service of the
applicant as given in the case of one Sh. Janam Singh with all
consequential benefits."
2. Claim of the petitioner(s) is that during earlier round of
litigation, in sequel to decision dated 20.9.2024 passed in CWP No. 596 of
1998 alongwith connected matters, a compromise was arrived at between
the petitioner(s) alongwith other similarly situated persons and respondent-
Corporation that they shall be treated regular from the date of extension of
such benefit to their counter parts and juniors to them anywhere in State in
any of the Divisions of the Corporation. Further that in furtherance to
aforesaid compromise benefit of regularisation was not extended to the
petitioner(s) in terms of settlement and, therefore, petitioner(s) approached
erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal by filing Original Application
Nos. 2012 of 2016 and 2019 of 2016, which on abolition of Tribunal have
been transferred to this Court and now have been converted into present
petitions i.e. CWPOA Nos. 7434 of 2019 and 7449 of 0219.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for respondents-Corporation has
submitted that though issue related to claim of petitioners regarding
entitlement of petitioners for regularisation on completion of 8 years service
3 ( 2024:HHC:5768 )
CWPOA Nos. 7434 & 7449 of 2019
as daily waged, stands decided in LPA No. 165 of 2021, titled State of H.P.
Vs. Surajmani and another and connected matters, however SLP preferred
.
in the Supreme Court is pending adjudication.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner(s), referring order dated
3.7.2024 passed in CWP No. 3428 of 2024 and matters connected
therewith, has submitted that similar cases, with agreement of the parties
including respondent-Corporation, have been disposed of by learned Single
Judge with directions that adjudication of the Supreme Court on the issue
shall be binding upon the parties. Learned counsel for Corporation is in
agreement for passing a similar order in present matter also.
5. In the aforesaid backdrop, as agreed between the parties,
these petitions are disposed of with direction that the adjudication of the
Supreme Court on the issue shall be binding upon the parties. In case,
persons similarly situated as the petitioners, may be from the
Corporation/Department of the petitioners or other Department, succeed
before the Supreme Court, then the petitioners shall be given same benefits
and in case the Department(s)/Corporation succeed before the Supreme
Court, then consequences shall ensue.
6. Needless to say, the admissible benefits shall be extended to
the petitioner(s) within five months after final decision of the Supreme
Court, failing which petitioner(s) shall be entitled for interest at the rate of
5% per annum from the date of accrual till final disbursement of the benefits
4 ( 2024:HHC:5768 )
CWPOA Nos. 7434 & 7449 of 2019
and in that eventuality interest, after payment of the same to the
petitioner(s), shall be recovered from the erring Officer/Officials responsible
.
for causing delay in disbursement and shall be deposited in the
Treasury/account of Corporation within four weeks thereafter.
7. It shall be duty of the petitioner(s), after decision of the
Supreme Court, to submit copy of judgment of the Supreme Court or
information regarding that to the Corporation and the period of five months
shall start from such date of information.
The petitions are allowed and disposed of, so also pending
application(s), if any.
(Vivek Singh Thakur),
Judge.
(Ranjan Sharma),
Judge.
22nd July, 2024
(Keshav)
