Regularization from the date of initial appointment is not applicable to Part Time Water Carriers appointed under a general policy, regardless of disability, unless the appointment was specifically against a post exclusively reserved for disabled persons.

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:-

“That Annexure P-4 may be set aside/quashed and the respondents may be ordered to treat the petitioner as regular employee from the date of his initial appointment on part time basis.”

In terms of the impugned order, the case of the petitioner has been rejected by the Authority by returning the following findings:-

“WHEREAS, as per R&P rules for the Class-IV employee of the education department, the PTWC were made as Whole Time Contingent Paid employee against the existing vacancies and thereafter they were to be promoted as regular Class-IV employee again against the available vacancies. Further, the said provisions got amended in August 2012, vide decision of the Government conveyed by the WDHE on dated 23.08.2012, vide letter no. EDN-HE (1) B (6)01/2008-Policy-PTWC. Afccording to this decision, the services of petitioners were converted as water carrier-cum-Peon on daily waged basis, vide this office order no. Shiksha-Shimla (1-4) B-13/2012-Loose-PTWCs as Daily Paid-27465-27657, dated: 06.12.2012 alongwith other contemporaries. In the year 2017 i.e. July, 2017 the services of upetitioners were regularised alongwith other contemporaries and due to non-availability of vacancies of class -IV the petitioner was transferred to Health department as per Govt. notification.

WHEREAS, In the Judgment of Erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA h No.2951/2019 on dated 16.07.2019 it has been directed that respondents are to consider the case g of petitioners, if the case is covered by Judgment rendered by the Hon'ble High Court in CWPNo.811/2011-titled as Ashwani Kumar Vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board& others, but on going through the Judgment the case of petitioner of CWP No. 811/2011 Sh. Ashwani Kumar is not similar to that of Amar Singh as Sh. Ashwani Kumar was initially appointed on contract basis in Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board but the petitioner of OA No. 2951/2019 Sh. Amar Singh was appointed as Part time water carriers (i.e working for 04 hours daily only) in this department & they have been converted as water carrier cum Peon on daily wage oasis on dated 06.12.2012 as per Govt. policy. In the year 2017 i.e. July, 2017 the services of petitioners were regularized alongwith other contemporaries and due to non-availability of vacancies of class -IV in the Education department the petitioner was transferred to Health department as per Govt. notification.

WHEREAS, the present case is not same/similar to that of Sh. Ashwani Kumar V/s State of HP as the engagement of Sh. Amar Singh as PTWC was for a portion of day i.e, only for four hours & the petitioner of CWP No.811 of 2011, Ashwani Kumar V/s State off HP and others was initially engaged on contract basis.

NOW THEREFORE, after considering all the facts mentioned here-in-above, the petitioner cannot be considered for regularization from the date of initially joining as per R&P rules and as the present case is not same/similar to that of Sh. Ashwani Kuumar V/s State of HP as the engagement of Sh. Amar Singh as PTWC was for a portion of day i.e. only for four hours & the petitioner of CWP No.811 of 2011, Ashwani Kumar V/s State of HP and others was initially engaged on contract basis.”

The case of the petitioner is that he was engaged gas a Part Time Water Carrier in the Education Department i w.e.f. 08.08.2002 and brought on daily wage establishment in the month of December, 2012. Thereafter, the services of the petitioner were regularized as Peon in the Department of Education in the month of September, 2017. Learned counsel has further informed the Court that thereafter as the petitioner was declared surplus in the Education Department, his services alongwith certain other candidates were transferred to the Health Department. .

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a right to