SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(HP) 1475

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA, J.
Ashok Kumar and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Others – Respondents
CWP No. 6947 of 2022
Decided On : 07-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ajay Sharma, Tarun K. Brakta
For the Respondents: Anup Rattan, Rajan Kahol, Vishal Panwar, Ravi Chauhan, Anish Banshtu, Rajesh Kashyap

Regularization of employment requires clear evidence of employer-employee relationships, adherence to constitutional provisions, and formal appointment processes.

Headnote:(A) The principles governing regularization of public employment as per the Supreme Court ruling in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi (3) (2006) 4 SCC 1 - Employment must adhere to constitutional mandates of equality (Articles 14, 16) and establish a clear employer-employee relationship. (Paras 21-22)

(B) Petitioners claimed regularization after serving for 15-16 years but failed to prove an employee-employer relationship or meaningful appointment by the Temple Trust, contradicting earlier findings of gratuitous service, thereby justifying dismissal. (Paras 6, 8, 23)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners worked as Sevadars at Mata Chintpurni Temple for 15-16 years, seeking regularization after earlier rejections. They claimed to be active workers, while respondents contended they served voluntarily without formal engagement. (Paras 1, 8)

Findings of Court:
Petitioners could not substantiate their claims of employment by providing mandatory documents like an appointment letter, which led to the rejection of claims. (Paras 10, 20)

Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioners established their employment under the Temple Trust, having made previous similar claims in a related case. (Paras 15, 23)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that petitioners failed to provide evidence for alleged employment, thus upholding previous court findings about their status as volunteers. (Paras 22-23)

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT : 

SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

1. Through instant petition, challenge has been laid to order dated 04.07.2022 passed by Commissioner Temple Chintpurni-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, whereby representation having been filed by the petitioners for regularization, in terms of order dated 06.05.2022 passed by Division Bench of this Court in Review Petition No. 137 of 2021, titled as Ashok Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. came to be rejected.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the pleadings adduced on record by the petitioners are that petitioners have been serving in Mata Chintpurni Temple as Langar Sevadars, Mandir Sevadars and Electricians for the last 15 to 16 years, but yet their request for regularization was not considered on one pretext or the other. Though representations made by the petitioners were forwarded to office of Commissioner (Temple), Chintpurni by the Temple Officer, but since no action was taken upon the same, petitioners filed CWP No.3925 of 2019, which was dismissed, vide judgment dated 22.09.2021 (Annexure P-3) on the premise that services of a Sevadar are gratuitous in nature. Though petitioners filed Review Petition No.137 of 2021, but same was dismissed. However, Division Bench of this Court permitted petitioners to file representation for redressal of their grievance with a direction to the respondents to decide the same, uninfluenced by the earlier order(s), more particularly, the order passed in CWP No.3925 of 2019.

3. In the afore background, petitioners submitted a representation dated 11.05.2022 to the Deputy Commissioner-cum- Commissioner, Mata Shree Chintpurni-Temple Trust, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-4), but the afore authority, vide impugned order dated 04.07.2022, rejected the same on the ground that petitioners were neither temporary nor casual employees, as such, their prayer for regularization cannot be accepted. In the afore background, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for the following main reliefs:-

“i. That impugned orders (Annexure P-8) being bad in law may very kindly be quashed and set aside with directions to the respondents to immediately and forthwith engage the petitioners as Sevadars in the Trust and regularize their services with all consequential benefits of pay, seniority etc.
ii. Respondents may very kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioners on their having completed 8 years of regular service with 240 days in every calendar year from the date of completion of the same or in any eventuality, in the alternative it is submitted that respondents may very kindly be directed to do the same with effect from 2019, when petitioners filed Writ Petition.”

4. Pursuant to notices issued in the instant proceedings, respondents No.1 to 5 have filed reply under the signatures of Temple Officer, Chintpurni, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, wherein an attempt has been made to refute the claim of the petitioners on the ground that petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands, as such, writ petition is barred by principle of suppressio veri and suggestio falsi. It has been further averred in the reply that none of the petitioners was working in the Temple Trust-Mata Shri Chintpurni nor they have been engaged by Temple Officer, Mata Shri Chintpurni Trust, District Una, which fact is otherwise evident from the averments contained in the petition as well as documents adduced on record by the petitioners.

5. By way of filing rejoinder to the reply filed by respondents No.1 to 5, petitioners have reiterated that for the last 15 to 16 years, they have been working at Mata Chintpurni Temple as Langar Sevadars, Mandir Sevadars and Electricians. To substantiate their afore claim, they have placed on record certain documents received by them under Right to Information Act suggestive of the fact that they were assigned duties of various works






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top