Daily wagers ineligible for retrospective work charge status or regularization without 240 days continuous service yearly over 8/10 years; fictional breaks plea inadmissible in writ if new in rejoinder, remediable via industrial tribunal.

Judgment :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Petitioner, Saroop Singh, had initially filed Civil Writ Petition No.1632 of 2015 before this Court, and upon establishment of State Administrative Tribunal, the matter was transferred to Tribunal and now upon abolition of Learned Tribunal, the matter has come up before this Court, as CWPOA No.2046 of 2019, seeking the following reliefs:-

“(i). That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued, directing the respondents to give the work charge status to the petitioner with all consequential benefits as Beldar with effect from the year 2002 and when they completed their 8 years service with 240 days as per the policy of the State Government and as per ration laid down in State of H.P. Versus Gauri Dutt and in view of the ratio laid down in Rakesh Kumar Versus State of H.P. Since the petitioner was engaged by the respondent department in the year 1994 and they worked as such with the respondent department till date and the petitioner has served as daily wagers for more than 20 years and they were entitled to get the work charge status with all consequential benefits.

(ii). That inquiry may be conducted regarding the difference of days contained in Mandays Chart i.e. the Mandays Chart filed in the reply bearing CWP(T) No.16345 of 2008 and Mandays Chart supplied under the Right to Information Act, 2005.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Case of the petitioner as set by Learned Counsel is that the petitioner was engaged as a Daily Wage Beldar in May, 1994 with Assistant Engineer, IPH, Sub Division Nagrota Surian, District Kangra and claims to have rendered continuous service of more than 240 days for last 20 years.

2(i). It is averred that the services of the petitioner were disengaged in September, 1995 against which he filed an Original Application No.1907 of 1995 and pursuant to the orders passed in October 1995, he was re-engaged by the respondents. It is averred that the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition (T) No.1635 of 2008, claiming regularization and the same was disposed of by this Court, on 04.05.2010 [Annexure P-1], with directions to State Authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization as per the judgment in the case of Gauri Dutt and Others versus State of Himachal Pradesh, Latesh HLJ 2008 (HP) 366.

2(ii). Pursuant to the directions passed by this Court on 04.05.2010 [Annexure P-1], the claim of the petitioner was rejected by Chief Engineer, IPH Dharamshala Zone on 12.05.2011 [Annexure P-2], on the ground that the claim of the petitioner was not covered as per judgment in the case of Guari Dutt (supra) and the fact that the petitioner had not completed continuous service in the year(s) 1994 and 1995 and then from 2001 to 2006 and then during 2009-2010 and thereafter in the year 2012. For non-completion of 8 years of continuous service with 240 days, the claim of the petitioner for regularization as per the Government Policy, was denied by the respondents.

2(iii). Petitioner has placed on record Mandays Chart [Annexure P-3] and had submitted a Legal Notice dated 24.06.2014 [Annexure P-5], requesting to reconsider the claim for regularization.

STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES IN REPLY- AFFIDAVIT:

3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice on 19.03.2015, the State Authorities have filed the Reply-Affidavit dated 06.07.2015 of Superintending Engineer, I&PH, Circle, Nurpur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh.

3(i). Perusal of the Reply-Affidavit indicates that the petitioner was engaged in the year 1994 and he has not completed 240 days in the year(s) 1994 and 1995; and then during the period from 2001 to 2007 and then during 2009-2010 and further in the year 2012. Respondents have placed on record the Mandays Chart [Annexure R-I with reply], which corroborates factum of non-completion of 2