_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 471 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 6 May, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                              CWP No.10269 of 2024
                                         Date of Decision: 6.5.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Sh. Raj Kumar
                                                         .........Petitioner
                                 Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
                                                        .......Respondents

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner:       Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate.
For the respondents:      Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr.
                          Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.
                          Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr.
                          Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for
                          the State.
                          Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Adocate, for respondent
                          No.3.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Since it is quite apparent from the reply filed by the

respondents that petitioner herein was allowed work charge status on

completion of eight years of daily wage service upto 31.12.2002 w.e.f.

1.1.2003 to 7.8.2006 on the analogy of Surajmani's case, subject to

outcome of SLP(C) No. 23016 of 2023, titled Surajmani v. State of

Himachal Pradesh and now there is no dispute that SLP filed in

Surajmani's case, has been disposed of with clear cut direction that

person after completion of eight years of daily wage service is entitled

to work charge status, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the

prayer made in the instant petition as far as conferment of work

charge status from the date of his having completed eight years of

daily wage service with 240 days in each calendar year, is concerned.

Since work charge status already stands conferred in favour of the

petitioner, this court, on account of mandate contained in Surajmani's

case as detailed herein above, deems it fit to dispose of the present

petition with direction to the respondents to take into consideration

service rendered by the petitioner while computing the qualifying

service for the purpose of pension. Ordered accordingly. Since

petitioner has been fighting for his rightful claim for years together,

this Court hopes and trusts that needful in terms of instant judgment

shall be done expeditiously, preferably, within two months. Learned

counsel for the petitioner undertakes on behalf of the petitioner to

submit relevant documents within one month, enabling the

respondents to do the needful within the stipulated time. Pending

applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

May 6, 2025                                      (Sandeep Sharma),
     (manjit)                                           Judge