Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ramesh Chand vs State Of H.P. & Others on 14 July, 2025
2025:HHC:22621
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWPOA No.3658, 3661, 3660, 3664,
.
3665, 3666, 3668, 3669, 3671, 3677,
3679, 3680, 3682, 3683, 3685, 3686,
3689,3691, 3694, 3697, 3699, 3701,
3702, 3704, 3705, 3707, 3708, 3710,
3712, 3713, 3716, 3719, 3721, 3723,
5893, 5906, 5907, 5911, 5917, 5921,
5923, 5927, 5940, 5943, 5946, 5948,
5950 & 5966 of 2020
Reserved on: 28.06.2025
r Date of Decision: 14.07.2025
1. CWPOA No.3658 of 2020
Ramesh Chand ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Nek Ram ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Yadav Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Ram Gopal ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Dhobi Devi & others ...Petitioners
Versus
.
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Lajja Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
7.
Shakuntla Devi
r to
Versus
...Petitioner
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Nirmla Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Brahmi Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Ranjeet Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Saina Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
.
Ruma Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Kamla Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
14. to
State of H.P. & others
Bir Singh
r ...Respondents
...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Meena Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Ruma Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Brahmi Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Bimla Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
.
Shanta Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Jagdish Chand ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Sheela Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Rajesh Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Jeewan Lal ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Vijay Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Sharda Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
.
Barfu Ram ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Sheela Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
28.
State of H.P. & others
Mehar Singh
r ...Respondents
...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Dhan Dev (deceased) through LRs ...Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Hema Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Jaiwanti Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Budhi Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Lal Singh ...Petitioner
.
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Meera Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Shridhar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Kamla Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Kima Devi alias Hakima Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Sansar Chand ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Drompti Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Dhyan Chand ...Petitioner
Versus
.
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Kartar Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Rakesh Kumar ...Petitioner
43.
r to
Versus
State of H.P. & others
...Respondents
Vidya Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Gurmail Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Anil Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Kanhi Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Rukmani Devi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Vinay Kumar ...Petitioner
.
Versus
State of H.P. & others ...Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? No.
For the petitioners: Mr. Suresh Kumar Sharma and Mr.
Ashok K. Verma, Advocates.
For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with
r Mr. Hemant K. Verma, Deputy Advocate
General.
Satyen Vaidya, Judge
All these petitions have been heard and are being
decided together as common questions of facts and law have
arisen.
2. The petitioners were initially engaged as daily wage
'Beldars' and later their services were regularized under the
regularization policy formulated by the State Government.
3. The petitioners are now seeking the relief for grant of
work charge status immediately on completion of 8 years of their
daily wage services, in terms of judgment passed by Division
Bench of this Court in LPA No.165 of 2021, titled State of H.P. &
others vs. Surajmani & another, which has further been
affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 06.02
2025 passed in SLP(C) No. 23016 of 2023 titled State of
Himachal Pradesh vs Surajmani and others.
.
4. The respondent-State has affirmed the factual
position that the judgment in Suraj Mani has attained finality.
5. In Suraj Mani, it has been held that a daily wage
worker having completed 8 years of continuous service will be
entitled for conferment of work charge status automatically.
6.
Thus, the petitioners herein being similarly situated to
the petitioners in Suraj Mani (supra) cannot be treated differently.
7. In result, all these petitions are allowed to the extent
of directing the respondents to confer the work charge status on
the petitioners immediately on completion of 8 years daily wage
continuous service, strictly in terms of the judgment dated
06.02.2025 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.
23016 of 2023 titled State of Himachal Pradesh vs Surajmani and
others.
8. Petitions are accordingly disposed of along with
pending application(s), if any.
( Satyen Vaidya )
Judge
July 14, 2025
(vt)
