Kali Charan vs Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board And Another

Ajay Mohan Goel, J

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

“(i) That the respondent department may be directed to extend the benefit of work charge status to the petitioner on the completion of 10 years of

daily wage services i.e. on 1.1.95 with all consequential benefits alongwith interest.

(ii) That the respondent department may kindly be directed to consider the qualifying service of the applicant for pension purpose from 1.1.95 from the

date of conferring work charge status to him.

(iii) That the respondents may very kindly be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to the case of the applicant for the kind perusal of this

Hon’ble Tribunal.â€​

The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed on daily wage basis in the year 1985 and his services were regularized as Helper in the

year 1987. He was superannuated from service in July, 2005.

The main contention of the petitioner is that his services rendered on daily wage basis as well as on work charged basis have to be taken into

consideration in terms of the judgment dated 08.03.2018, passed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, titled Sunder

Singh versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of the law laid down by Hon’ble the

Supreme Court in para 5 of the judgment (supra), this petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents -Board to pay the pension to the

petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondents-Board, submits that as the petitioner has approached the Court at a belated stage, the writ petition deserves to

be dismissed on account of delay and latches. He further submits that besides this, otherwise also, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief prayed for

in the writ petition, as the right of pension has not accrued in favour of the petitioner in terms of the services rendered by him within the prevailing

Rules.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the pleadings as well as aforesaid judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court,

relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner. Paras 5 & 6 of the judgment (supra), are extracted hereunder:-

“5. Even though strictly construing the Rules, the appellants may not be entitled to pension. However, reading the rules consistent with Articles 14,

38 and 39 of the Constitution of India and applying the doctrine of proportionate equality, we are of the view that they are entitled to weightage of

service rendered as daily wagers towards regular service for the purpose of pension.

Accordingly, we direct that w.e.f 01.01.2018, the appellants or other similarly placed Class-IV employees will be entitled to pension if they have

been duly regularized and have been completed total eligible service for more than 10 years. Daily wage service of 5 years will be treated equal to one

year of regular service for pension. If on that basis, their services are more than 8 years but less than 10 years, their service will be reckoned as ten

years.â€​

In my considered view, the limited relief to which the petitioner is entitled to, is that the services which were rendered by him before his

regularization have to be taken into consideration in terms of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, referred to above, to determine whether the

petitioner is entitled for grant pensionary benefit and if yes, then for the same benefit he is entitled to. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed

of with a direction to the respondents/Board that the case of the petitioner shall be examined in terms of the law laid down in Paras 5 and 6 of the

aforesaid judgment dated 08.03.2018, passed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, titled Sunder Singh versus State of

Himachal Pradesh and others. Thereafter, necessary orders for grant of pension, if otherwise found entitled to, shall be passed by the respondents-

Board in favour of the petitioner. Needful be done by the respondents/Board within a period of eight weeks from today. Pending miscellaneous

application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.