Kapil Dev And Others vs State Of H.P. And Others

Sandeep Sharma, J

Petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief:-

“i) That the writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued to the respondents to grant work charge status to the petitioners w.e.f. 1-1-2004 as per the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in CWP 2735/10 titled as Rakesh Kumar V/S State of H.P. and others, with all the consequential benefits thereof such as arrears of salary, pay fixation etc.

ii) That the respondents maybe directed to grant seniority and consequential benefits from back date.”

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners was engaged as a Daily Wage Chaiman with the respondent Department with effect from 1995-96. The petitioners were liable to be granted work charge status after completion of eight years of service. Case of the petitioners is covered by the decision of this Court in LPA No.165 of 2021, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh & Others vs. Surajmani and Another, decided on 12.1.2023, alongwith connected matters.

Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General has opposed the petition. However, he has failed to controvert the factual/legal aspect of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Operative portion of the order dated 12.1.2023, passed in LPA No.165 of 2021 reads as under:-

“57. In view of the above, the writ petitions filed by the employees are allowed and the respondents are directed to grant work charge status to the employees from the date they had completed eight years of service on daily wage basis in terms of the decision given by this Court in Ashwani Kumar’s case supra. However, benefits consequent to conferment of work charge status in terms of instant judgment shall be restricted to three years for the period prior to filing of petition.

The Letters Patent Appeal(s), which have been filed by the respondents/State/employer against the orders passed by learned Single Judge, including LPA No.165 of 2021, as well as writ petitions filed by the respondents/State/employer against the orders passed by the Tribunal, are dismissed with the clarification that the benefits consequent on conferment of work charge status in terms of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge shall be restricted to three years for the period prior to filing of petition.”

Since the case of the petitioners is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in LPA No.165 of 2021, consequently, this petition is disposed of by directing that the decision of this Court in LPA No.165 of 2021, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh & Others vs. Surajmani and Another, decided on 12.1.2023, shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case of the petitioners and, if found similarly situate to the respondent in Surajmani, they be released consequential benefits, within six weeks from today.

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