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) 1608

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Dhian Chand and another - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others - Respondent
CWPOA No.724 of 2020 a/w CWPOA No.1451 of 2020
Decided On : 19-11-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. D.K. Khanna, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Navlesh Verma, Additional, Deputy Advocate General

Daily wagers entitled to notional work charge status after 8 years continuous service despite no departmental establishment; pre-cut-off engagement allows deemed superannuation at 60 years with revised retiral benefits, no past arrears.

Headnote:(A) Service Jurisprudence - Daily wagers - Conferment of work charge status - Entitlement after completion of 8 years continuous daily wage service with 160 days per year in tribal areas - Forest Department decision denying work charge establishment not retrospective and not prerequisite - Status granted notionally without past arrears - Equality mandates similar treatment to similarly placed - Supported by binding precedents upholding status irrespective of establishment type. (Paras 6(i) to 6(viii))

(B) Superannuation - Age of retirement - Daily wagers engaged prior to cut-off date entitled to continue till 60 years despite later regularization - Date of initial engagement decisive - Deemed service beyond 58 years with notional pay fixation for retiral benefits like pension, gratuity from deemed superannuation date - No actual arrears for unworked period. (Paras 7(i), 7(ii))

Facts of the case:
Petitioners engaged as daily wagers as Beldar in tribal area Forest Division, completed 8 years continuous service by 2001/2002 with 160 mandays/year, regularized as Forest Worker w.e.f. 2007 in 2008, retired at 58 years seeking work charge status from completion of 8 years and service continuity till 60 years with benefits. Respondents denied work charge status citing no work charge establishment and retirement at 58 post-regularization.

Findings of Court:
Work charge status from 01.01.2002/01.01.2003 notionally without arrears; deemed in service till 60 years (31.12.2019/30.06.2022) with notional benefits, revised retiral from 01.01.2020/01.07.2022; implement by 31.01.2026 else 6% interest.

Issues: (1) Eligibility for work charge status after 8 years despite no work charge establishment; (2) Retirement age entitlement to 60 years for pre-cut-off daily wagers post-regularization.

Ratio Decidendi: Work charge status accrues on completing 8 years irrespective of later departmental decisions or establishment status per binding judgments; discrimination in denying to similars violates equality; superannuation determined by engagement date pre-10.05.2001 entitling 60 years service notionally per Full Bench directive.

Result: Petitions allowed with directions.

Table of Content
1. petitioners claim work-charge after 8 years and retirement till 60. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. respondents deny work-charge establishment and 60-year retirement. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. work-charge status accrues post-8 years irrespective of establishment. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)

JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, Judge

Since common question is involved and prayer(s) are identical, therefore, with the consent of parties, both these cases are taken up for adjudication and disposal together at this stage, in the interests of justice and case of Dhian Singh is treated as lead case.

2. Petitioners, Dhian Singh and Kushla, initially filed Original Application No.6686 of 2016 before State Administrative Tribunal and after abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court as CWPOA No.724 of 2020, wherein, the petitioners have sought the following reliefs:-

“7(i) That the respondents be directed to grant regularization of the service to the applicant after completion of 8 years of service i.e. w.e.f. 01-05-1999 or 31-03-2000 with all consequential benefits including seniority, continuity, annual increments, earned leave and all other consequential benefits including arrears accruing thereon on this account.

7(ii) That the respondents be directed to retire the applicants after completing 60 years of service i.e. w.e.f. 31-10-2019 and 30-06-2022 instead of 31-10-2017 and 30-06-2020 and the applicant be paid all consequential benefits;

7(iii) That the respondents may further be restrained from retiring the applicant prematurely and allow the applicants to work till attaining the age of 60 years as per Annexure A-6 & A-7.

7(iv) That the respondent may be directed to grant work-charge status to the applicants after 8 years of service i.e. w.e.f. 01-05-1999 with all consequential benefits including seniority, continuity, annual increments, earned leave and all other consequential benefits including arrears accruing thereon on this account.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

3. First grievance of petitioners, Dhian Chand and Kushla is that they were engaged as Beldar in the Office of Forest Range Officer, in Pangi Forest Division at Killar in District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, which is a tribal area in 1991 and petitioners have rendered 8 years of continuous daily wage service with 160 days in each calendar year [prescribed for tribal areas] and based on continuous service, petitioners were regularized as Forest Worker on 15.03.2008 [in case of both the petitioners] w.e.f. 11.10.2007 [Annexure A-1 and Annexure A-2]. Despite having been regularized, the claim of petitioners is for work charge status from the date they complete 8 years of continuous daily wage service. Petitioner No.1 has placed on record Mandays Chart [Annexure A-3], which shows that he was engaged on daily wage service in 1995 and after completing required Mandays of 160 days in tribal areas, petitioner No.1 completed 8 years of continuous daily wage service as on 31.12.2002 and became eligible for conferment of work charge status from the date he completes 8 years of continuous daily wage service. So far as petitioner No.2-Kushla, she was engaged on daily wage service 1994 and as per Mandays Chart [Annexure A-4], she completed 8 years of continuous service on 31.12.2001 and became eligible for grant of work charge status from 01.01.2002. For asserting the claim for conferment of work charge status, petitioners have placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Rakesh Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others alongwith connected matters [CWP No.2735 of 2010] [Annexure A-5] and judgment in the case of The State of Himachal Pradesh & others Versus Kartar Singh [LPA No.212 of 2015 [Annexure A-11] by asserting the claim on the basis of policy dated 06.05.2000 [Annexure A-12]. In this background, petitioners have claimed the grant of work charge status from the date they complete 8 years of continuous daily wage service of 160 days [as is prescribed in tribal areas] with all consequ

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