Sansar Chand vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—Though the Petitioner has sought for the relief of retrospective regularization, we are afraid that the same cannot be considered at this distance of time. Therefore, the first prayer is rejected. As far as the second prayer is concerned, the issue raised in this writ petition pertains to the question whether 50% of the daily waged service is liable to be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

We are informed that the issue is covered in favour of the worker by the decision of this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Sarab Dayal in CWP No. 180 of 2001 decided;on 19.7.2007.

It is pointed out that the matter is pending before the Apex Court. The parties agree that they will also be bound by the outcome of the decision, now pending before the Apex Court, so that the case also need not be taken to the Apex Court. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of, making it clear that in case the decision of this Court is implemented in the case of the similarly situated persons, in the case of the Petitioner herein also, the judgment will be implemented expeditiously subject to the result of the matter pending before the Apex Court. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case and, therefore, it will be certainly open to the Authority concerned to examine whether on facts Sarab Dayal''s case would apply to the applicant.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.