_________________________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P. & Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 607 HP

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 607 HP
Judgement Date : 7 May, 2025

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_________________________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 7 May, 2025

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.14710 of 2024 Decided on: 7th May, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Jagdish Chand ....Petitioner

Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents _________________________________________________________________

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting?

_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 4.

                                        Mr. Rangil Singh,                   Advocate   for
                                        respondent No.5.



Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Even though the respondents have not filed the

reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the

parties, matter is taken up for disposal at this state.

2. Petitioner was engaged in the Forest Department

on daily wage basis as Forest Worker on 01.07.1994. His

services were regularized on 01.09.2007. Petitioner retired on

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes

30.01.2012.

3. Petitioner instituted CWP No.8070 of 2023,

seeking benefit of Daulat Ram and Ors. Vs. State of H.P. &

Ors2. In essence, petitioner prayed for conferring upon him

work charge status on completion of eight years of daily

waged service with 240 days in each calendar year.

Respondents rejected his case on 19.10.2024 (Annexure P-7).

Feeling aggrieved, petitioner instituted this writ petition,

seeking following substantive reliefs:-

"(i) That writ in the nature of certiorari may very kindly be issued, whereby quashing and setting aside the impugned office order dated 19.10.2024, Annexure P-7, issued by the respondent No.2, being illegal and arbitrary.

(ii) That writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant the work charge status/regularization to petitioner immediately on completion of 8 years of continuous daily wage service with 240 days in each calendar year with effect from due date, i.e., 01.01.2002, with all consequential benefits including pay fixation, pay arrears, increments, seniority and other benefits etc.

(iii) That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant the benefits of two years, i.e., w.e.f.

01.02.2012 to 31.01.2014, by considering the

CWPOA No.5554 of 2019, decied on 07.03.2022.

retirement of the petitioner w.e.f. 31.01.2014 instead of 31.01.2012, i.e., till the age of 60 years, being Class-IV employee.

(iv) That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued, directing the respondents to count the services rendered by the petitioner, i.e., w.e.f. 01.01.2002 instead of 01.01.2007 and also w.e.f. 31.01.2014 instead of 31.01.2012, for the purpose of qualifying services for the grant of pension and other retiral benefits, as per the settled position of law."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner are now governed by

the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of

Himachal Pradesh and Ors. Vs. Surajmani & Anr.3 and

Jogi Ram Vs. State of H.P. 4 He further submitted that

petitioner would be satisfied in case respondents are directed

to consider the case of the petitioner afresh for grant of

reliefs prayed for by him keeping in view aforesaid decisions.

This is not opposed by learned counsel for the respondents.

It is not disputed that the impugned order dated

19.10.2024 (Annexure P-7) was passed by the respondents

prior to the decision rendered in Surajmani3.