IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Ranjeet Singh - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Himachal Pradesh & Others - Respondent
CWPOA No.3330 of 2020
Decided On : 02-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. daily wager claims work charge post 8 years. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. state denies due to abolition, regularization. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. eligible for work charge status from 01.01.2003. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, Judge
Petitioner, Ranjeet Singh had initially filed an Original Application i.e. OA No 6670 of 2017 before Learned Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal and upon abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred to this Court as CWPOA No. 3330 of 2020, seeking the following relief(s):
“(i). That the applicant is entitled for regularization in terms of judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court in Rakesh Kumar vs. State of H.P. in CWP 2735/2010 decided on 28.07.2010 and followed by this Hon’ble Tribunal.
(ii). That the arrears w.e.f. completion of 8 years with interest may also be granted in favour of the applicant.
(iii). That the applicant be considered for regularization in term of Rakesh Kumar CWP 2735/2020 in completion of 8 years.
(iv). That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the applicant w.e.f. after completion of 8 ears with 240 days in one calendar year.”
FACTUAL MATRIX:
2. Grievance is that the petitioner was engaged as an Air Compressor Operator [Class-III] w.e.f. 15.05.1995 under HPPWD, Division Kalpa in District Kinnaur, which is a tribal area on 15.05.1995 and he was regularized as Air Compressor Operator w.e.f. 13.12.2006 [Annexure A-1] and he retired from service on 30.04.2016 [Annexure A-3].
2(i). In this backdrop, the petitioner has filed the instant petition that the State Authorities have granted regularization/work charge status to daily waged incumbents from the date they completed 08 years of continuous service whereas the respondents have granted regularization to the petitioner after about 11 years on 13.12.2006 [Annexure A-2] and he joined on 14.12.2006 [Annexure A-3] but the Respondents have denied work charge status from the date he completed requisite 08 years continuous service [i.e. 180 days for tribal areas] from the due date.
In instant petition, a prayer is made for seeking the benefit of regularization/work charge status to the petitioner from due date of completion of 08 years of continuous daily waged service from 01.01.2003 with all consequential benefits.
STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES IN REPLY- AFFIDAVIT:
3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice on 08.01.2018, the State Authorities have filed Reply- Affidavit dated 27.02.2018 of Superintending Engineer 11th Circle, Rampur.
3(i). Perusal of the Reply-Affidavit admits the incumbency that the petitioner was engaged as daily waged Air Compressor Operator w.e.f. 15.05.1995 and was regularized on 13.12.2006 on the same post. It is averred that petitioner joined the regularization without protest. Reply-Affidavit indicates that the work charge status from the date of completion of 08 years of continuous service i.e. w.e.f. 01.01.2003 cannot be granted to the petitioner as work charge establishment in case of Class-III employees, stood abolished by the State Government w.e.f. 01.04.2001. The Mandays Chart was enclosed with the reply as Annexure R-1. Reply-Affidavit further indicates that once the petitioner stands regularized on 14.12.2006 [Annexure A-2] therefore, the claim for work charge status from an anterior date was not tenable. It is in this background that the respondents have opposed the claim of the petitioner.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner on Instructions states that he does not intend to file rejoinder [Statement Taken on Record].
5. Heard, Mr. Bhim Raj Sharma, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Kumar Chaudhary, Learned State Counsel and have gone through the material available on record.
ANALYSIS:
6. Taking into account the entirety of the facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that though the claim of the petitioner in the instant petition is for regularization from the date of completion of 08 years of continuous service but the c
Kanishk Sinha & another versus The State of West Bengal and others
Daily wagers entitled to work-charged status after 8 years continuous service from due date with notional pay fixation benefits only, no past arrears, despite subsequent regularization or establishme....
Daily wagers entitled to work-charged status after 8 years continuous service from due date, restricted to notional pay fixation and increments sans past arrears, even post-regularization or absent w....
Daily wagers gain work charge status after 8 years continuous service (240 days/year), limited to notional benefits without arrears, even post-regularization or sans work charge setup.
Daily wagers completing 8 years continuous service with 240 days/year entitled to work charge status from eligibility date but only notional benefits without actual arrears for irregular appointments....
Daily wagers entitled to work charge status after 8 years continuous service with notional pay fixation, annual increments prospectively sans arrears; such service counts for pensionary benefits.
Disputed prior daily wage service claims require Industrial Tribunal adjudication, not writ court; post-1993 daily wagers entitled to work-charged status after 8 years continuous 240-days service wit....
Daily wagers granted work charge status after 8 years service entitled only to notional pay fixation benefits prospectively, without past arrears; such arrears to others deemed excess and recoverable....
Daily wagers entitled to work charge status from date of completing eight years continuous service (240+ days/year); later abolition ineffective; limited to notional pay fixation benefits without arr....
The court ruled that employees must be granted work charge status from the date of completion of eight years of service to ensure fairness and prevent discrimination, aligning with Articles 14 and 16....
Point of Law : Law of Limitation, is not applicable, however principle of delay and laches is attracted for adjudication of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner m....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.