Back
2025 Supreme(HP) 1864
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Yashpal Singh - Petitioner
Versus
The State of H.P. and others - Respondents
CWPOA No: 355 of 2019 Alongwith CWPOA No:7679 of 2020
Decided On : 11-12-2025
Important Points
Subject
Service Law - Regularization and Promotion of Daily Wagers
Act Referred
Headnote
Facts of the case:
Daily waged Beldars engaged in lift drinking water supply schemes from 1993/1996, underwent two-month Pump Operator training in 2005, regularized as Beldars in 2006, redesignated as Pump Operator Helpers in 2010. Sought retrospective redesignation from initial dates, parity, promotion to Pump Operator citing vacancies, retrospective regularization from 8 years service completion, or work charged status.
Findings of Court:
Petitions partly allowed directing consideration for work charged status as Beldar from 01.04.2004/01.01.2002 if 8 years continuous service rendered, with notional pay fixation benefits forward but no past arrears; other claims disallowed.
Issues: Entitlement to retrospective redesignation post-training; parity in redesignation/regularization; eligibility for Pump Operator appointment/promotion absent qualifications/feeder status; retrospective regularization sans vacancies; work charged status per Supreme Court directive.
Ratio Decidendi: Redesignation prospective per policy as pre-training ineligibility bars retrospectivity; promotion/appointment strictly per statutory rules excluding short training equivalence or relaxation sans necessity; regularization requires vacancies/seniority; work charged status consideration mandated post-8 years with limited relief.
Result: Petitions partly allowed.
For the Respondent:Mr. Amit K. Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case transfer and identical reliefs claimed. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioners' engagement and training as beldars. (Para 5) |
| 3. state denies retrospective redesignation and promotion eligibility. (Para 6) |
| 4. court hears state counsel sans petitioner appearance. (Para 7) |
| 5. redesignation post-training, not retrospective. (Para 8) |
| 6. retrospective regularization requires vacancies and proof. (Para 9) |
| 7. direct work-charged status reconsideration per supreme court. (Para 10) |
| 8. petitions partly allowed for work-charged status only. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT :
Ranjan Sharma, J.
Petitioners, Yashpal Singh and Satinder Singh, being daily waged Beldars at the relevant time, filed CWP No. 1120 of 2010 and CWP No 704 of 2010 before this Court; and on establishment of Learned State Administrative Tribunal, these petitions were transferred to Tribunal; now upon its abolition, the matters have been transferred to this Court, as CWPOA No. 355 of 2019, Yashpal Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh and others and CWPOA No 7679 of 2020, Satender Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh and others.
2. Since the factual matrix as well as the relief claimed in both writ petitions is identical therefore, CWPOA No. 355 of 2019, Yashpal Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh and others, is treated as “Lead Case” for adjudicating both the connected cases together.
3. Upon transfer of both the matters to this Court, same were listed on various occasions and on listing of cases on 05.06.2020 none appeared for the petitioners and even thereafter, none had put in appearance on 14.07.2020 and 23.09.2020. Even upon listing of the matter today, there is no representation for the petitioner(s).
4. Since the relief(s) sought for in both the writ petitions are pari-materia, therefore, the prayer made in Lead Case, Yashpal Singh (CWPOA No. 355 of 2019); originating from CWP No.1112 of 2010) are reproduced hereinbelow:-
“(i) That the writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued to quash and set aside the order dated 13-12-2006 at Annexure P-6 for modification whereby the services of the petitioner have not been regularized from 1-4-2004 after taking into account the cut of date i.e. 31-3-2004 as per Annexure P-5 and directions may kindly be issued to the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to abide by the directions of the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh/ respondent No.1 to issue order to regularize the services of the petitioner as Beldar from 1-4-2004 as per Annexure P-5.
(ii) That the writ of Mandamus may kindly be issued for allowing re-designation to the petitioner after converting the post of Beldar into regular Pump Operator-cum- Helper from 1-4-2004, the date when the services of the petitioner is sought to be regularized as Beldar in view of the decision of the Govt./ respondents at Annexure P-4, Annexure P-7 and Annexure P-8.
(iii) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued against the respondents directing them to include the posts of Pump Operator Helper/Beldar working exclusively at lift drinking water supply scheme, as feeder category to the promotion of Pump Operator in Clause No.11 of the R&P Rules at Annexure P-12.
(iv) That the writ of mandamus may kindly be issued against the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion either by way of re-designation or otherwise to the post of Pump Operator as 49 post of Pump Operators are lying vacant in the Circle Office of respondent No.3 as per Annexure P-10 and also allow the pay scale of Rs.3120-5160/- along with other benefits with the similar qualification.
FACTUAL MATRIX IN LEAD CASE: CWPOA No 355 OF 2019 ORIGINATING FROM CWP No. 1112 OF 2010) YASHPAL SINGH VS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH:
5. Pleadings indicate that petitioner Yashpal Singh was engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in Lift Drinking Water Supply Scheme, Mangarh, in Sub Division Sarahan w.e.f. 01.04.1996 onwards and while working as such, the Respondents took a decision on 19.03.2005/19.04.2005 (Annexure P-1) to send matriculate Beldars
