Back
2010 Supreme(HP) 423
HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH, J.
SUDESH PAL RANA AND & ORS
Petitioners
VERSUS
STATE OF H.P. & ORS.
Respondents
CWP No. 541 of 2009
Decided on 9-3-2010.
For the Petitioners:Mr. A.K.Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. P.M. General Negi, with Dy. Mrs. Advocate Shubh Mahajan, Dy.
Advocate General.
The entitlement to work-charge status and its applicability as per the policy in vogue were the central legal points established in the judgment.
Headnote:
Work-Charge Status - Regularization of Daily Paid Labourers - The court directed the respondents to grant notionally work-charge status to the petitioners from the dates they are entitled to work-charge status as per Mool Raj Upadhyaya with all actual consequential service benefits permissible in law.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought the benefit of work-charge status from the date they completed 10 years of service, citing Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316. The respondents argued that the work-charge status was not applicable to their department as per the policy in vogue.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the statements made by the learned Dy. Advocate General and previous judgments, directed the respondents to grant notionally work-charge status to the petitioners from the dates they are entitled to work-charge status as per Mool Raj Upadhyaya with all actual consequential service benefits permissible in law.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to work-charge status from the date they completed 10 years of service, and if the work-charge status was applicable to the respondents' department as per the policy in vogue.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on previous judgments and the argument presented by the learned Dy. Advocate General to reach its decision.
Final Decision: The respondents were directed to grant notionally work-charge status to the petitioners from the dates they are entitled to work-charge status as per Mool Raj Upadhyaya with all actual consequential service benefits permissible in law.
Kuldip Singh, J.(Oral)-The learned counsel for the petitioners has confined his reliefs to petitioners to the effect that respondents may be directed to grant the benefit of work-charge status to all the petitioners from the date they have completed 10 years of service with all consequential benefits such as pay fixation, seniority and arrears of pay.
2. The brief facts as per petitioners are that they were engaged as beldars in the Horticulture Department. The petitioners have given their dates of engagement and regularization in the memo of parties. The better course was that such dates should have been given in the main body of the petition, however, the relevant particulars of the petitioners are as follows:
3. The further case of the petitioners is that as per Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316, the petitioners were entitled to work-charge status from the dates they had completed 10 years of service. They were not given the work-charge status instead they were regularized much later on. The petitioners have suffered in the matter of seniority, promotion, pay fixation and pension etc. Mool Raj Upadhyaya (supra) is applicable to all the departments. It has been pleaded that after the judgment rendered in Gauri Dutt & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. Latest H.L.J. 2008(1) 366, there is no confusion to confine the benefits of work-charged status from the due date of employees of HPPWD and IPH departments
Sr. No. Petitioner Date of engagement Date of regularization
1. Sudesh Pal Rana 24.4.1992 December 7 ,2006
2. Duni Chand April, 1992 Sept. 8, 2003
3. Smrt. Mani Devi May 19,1981 Nov. 25, 1997
4. Hans Raj Sharma June 16, 1992 Dec. 7, 2006
5. Smt. Krishana Devi March 20,1978 1.1.1996
6. Satya Paul Feb. 1, 1988 June 19, 2000
7. Smt. Durga Devi August 16, 1978 January 2, 1996
only. It has been submitted that as per Mool Raj Upadhyaya (supra) all daily waged workmen who had completed 10 years of service upto 31.12.1993 would be given the work-charge status
w.e.f. 1.1.1994 and those who shall complete 10 years of service thereafter would be brought on work charged establishment from the date they complete 10 years of service.
4. The respondents have filed reply and have submitted that the petitioners were engaged as daily paid labourers in the respondent department and have been regularized against the available vacant posts of Class-IV as per seniority from the prospective dates as per policy framed by the State Government for regularization of daily paid labourers. The work-charge status is not applicable to the respondent department as per the policy in vogue and as such the petitioners cannot be permitted to claim work-charge status contrary to the policies and instructions of the Government.
5. The Govt. of Himachal Pradesh initially framed the policy for regularization of daily paid labourers circulated on 11.7.1995. As per policy the daily waged workers in all the departments (other then Public Works and Irrigation and Public Health Department/ Boards/ Corporation/ Universities etc.) who had completed 10 years or more then continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in each calendar year as on 31.3.1995 shall be regularized w.e.f. 1.4.1995 only up to the number of posts available in the respective organization. In continuation to the aforesaid policy certain instructions for regularization of daily waged workers were issued by the State government from time to time. The latest instructions were issued on 9.9.2008. The petitioners stand already regularized with the respondents department. The work charge status is not applicable to the respondents department as per the policy in vogue and therefore work charge status cannot be granted to the petitioners contrary to the policies.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the present case is squarely covered by judgments dated 21.12.2009 passed in CWP No.1653 of 2008 and C
