AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 217 wordsJustice Rajiv Sharma, Judge
Petitioner was appointed as Beldar w.e.f. September, 1994 to February, 1998 and July and August, 1998 and thereafter, he started discharging his duties as Mason w.e.f. March, 1998 to 22.12.2006. However, fact of the matter is that the petitioner has been regularized as Beldar instead of Mason on 22.12.2006. Mr. . . Onkar Jairath, Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in Gauri Dutt and others versus State of H.P., Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366, the petitioner ought to have been given an option to be considered against the higher post on which he was working at the time of regularization.
Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-State to seek the option of the petitioner, in view of the judgment cited hereinabove, whether he would like to be regularized on the higher post of Mason, taking into consideration the larger period he is working in this capacity, within a period of 10 weeks after production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. It is made clear that in the eventuality of the petitioner''s being regularized on the higher post, he shall be entitled to all the consequential benefits. No costs.