Piar Chand vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The Petitioner is aggrieved since he is sought to be retired on 31.5.2011. According to the Petitioner since he had been engaged as Beldar prior to 10.5.2001, he is entitled to continue till he attains the age of 60 years. Reliance is placed on the judgment in LPA No. 196 of 2010, rendered on 21.10.2010. In the said judgment, we have held that Beldars appointed prior to 10.5.2001 be it on daily wages or regular, are entitled to continue up to the age of 60 years. That judgment was rendered based only on a circular dated 22.2.2010. The position under the R&P Rules was not brought to the notice of this Court. As per the R&P Rules only those regular appointees prior to 10.5.2001 alone are entitled to continue till they attain the age of 60 years. The circular dated 22.2.2010 enables those Beldars appointed prior to 10.5.2001 and who had not been regularized in service to continue as such till they attain the age of 60 years. That circular will not apply in the case of Beldar appointed on 10.5.2001 and regularized after that date, in view of the unambiguous position as available under the R & P Rules. Therefore, the judgment dated October 21, 2010 in LPA No. 196 of 2010 does not reflect the correct position in law and it is a judgment rendered sub silentio and hence does not have any precedential value. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that State has already taken steps to file review in the judgment.

In the case of the Petitioner, the regular appointment is on 1.1.2003. Therefore, he is to retire on attaining the age of 58 years. If the Petitioner is to establish before the second Respondent that he was entitled to either work charge status or regularization prior to 10.5.2001, he will be entitled to continue till he attains the age of 60 years.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application (s), if any.