SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 1944

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA


CWP No. 5624 of 2026


Decided on: 22.04.2026


The Executive Engineer, I & P.H, Division, Dalhousie

…..Petitioner

Versus

Chaman Singh

.....Respondent


Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua


For the petitioner: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta & Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocates General.

For the Respondent: Nemo.


Jyotsna Rewal Dua


Judge


April 22, 2026

Petitioner Advocates:Deputy Advocate General ,Respondent Advocate:

##PAGE1##

1 ( 2026:HHC:12798 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 5624 of 2026

Decided on: 22.04.2026 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Executive Engineer, I & P.H, Division, Dalhousie …..Petitioner

Versus Chaman Singh .....Respondent

----------------------------------------------------- -----------------------

Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes

For the petitioner: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mur. Y.P.S. Dhaulta & Mr. L.N. Sharma,

Additional Advocates General.

For the Respondent: Nemo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

State feels aggrieved against the order passed

by the learned Labour Court -cum- Industrial Tribunal, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. on 16.09.2025 in an

Happlication moved by the respondent-workman under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Hence, this writ petition.

In terms of the impugned order, respondent-

workman has been held entitled to an amount of ₹16,07,721/- towards his full wages from 03.07.2013 (date of award) to 22.02.2019 (date of re-engagement) alongwith

1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2026 12:10:51 :::CIS

##PAGE2##

2 ( 2026:HHC:12798 )

interest @6% per annum from the date of the order till

realization of the amount.

2. Heard learned Additional Advocate General and

considered the case file.

3. The Case

3(i). On an industrial dispute raised by the respondent- workman, the appropriate government sent following reference for adjudication to the learned Industrial

Tribunal-cum- Labour Court:-

“Whether termination of the services of Sh.

Chamaon Singh S/o Sh. Kehar Singh by the Executive Engineer, I & P.H Division, Dalhousie, District CChamba, H.P. w.e.f. 11/2000 after paying retrenchment compensation and retaining the junior workmen, as alleged by the worker, is proper and justified? If not, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and compensation

the aggrieved workman is entitled to?”

Learned Labour Court adjudicated the reference

and passed an award in favour of the respondent-workman

on 03.07.2013 as under:-

“The retrenchment of the petitioner is set-

aside and quashed. The respondent is directed to re-engage the petitioner forthwith. He shall be entitled to the seniority and continuity in service from the date of his illegal termination i.e. 16.11.2000 except back wages. The respondent is also directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services as per the policies framed by the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh from time to time. It is made clear that if the services of any person junior to the petitioner have already been

::: Downloaded on - 25/04/2026 12:10:51 :::CIS

##PAGE3##

3 ( 2026:HHC:12798 )

regularized, he (petitioner) shall be entitled to the regularization from the date/month of the

regularization of the services of his junior(s).”

In terms of the award, retrenchment of the

respondent was set-aside. Petitioner was directed to re- engage the respondent-workman forthwith. Respondent- workman was further held entitled f to seniority and continuity in service from the date of his illegal termination i.e. 16.11.2000 except back twages. Petitioner-State was also directed to consider the case of the respondent- workman for regularization of his services as per applicable policies. Respondent-workman was held entitled to regularization from the date, his juniors, if any had been

regularized.

3(ii). The award was assailed by the petitioner-State in Civil Writ Petition No.4599/2014. The writ petition was dismissed on 06.04.2015. Petitioner-State assailed the judgment dated 06.04.2015 in Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) No. 40/2016. The LPA was also dismissed on 13.04.2016. The Special Leave Petition preferred by the petitioner-State was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 24.09.2018. The award was still not implemen

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