Shri Hardeep Singh vs The State of H.P. and others

V.K. Sharma, Judge

The petition has been filed with the following prayers vide para 7 (i) & (ii):-

(i) That the present O.A. may kindly be allowed and respondents may be directed to regularize the services of the applicant as Work Inspector instead of Beldar as he has worked on the said post for nine years with all consequential benefits.

(ii) The respondents be directed to pay the difference of salary and other benefits to the applicant from the date of regularizing of his services as Beldar instead of Work Inspector.

In reply, the respondents have taken the following stand vide para 1 of the preliminary submissions:-

That no cause of action is accrued in favour of the applicant to file the present application. The applicant was engaged as daily waged Beldar w.e.f. 1.1.1990 and worked upto ''Feb., 1994 on the above designation and thereafter he has given the Muster Roll of daily waged Work Inspector w.e.f. 1.3.1994 till the date of his appointment as work charged Beldar. The detailed mandays chart is annexed as Annexure R-1. As per the present policy of the Government of Himachal Pradesh a daily waged worker who have completed eight years or more service with 240 days or more in each calendar year as on31.3.2000 will be regularised on the lower post as per direction/orders issued by the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India in Mool Raj Upadhya vs. State of H.P. and others which was decided on 19.4.1999 which reads as under:-

Daily waged Muster Roll workers whether a skilled or unskilled who have completed 10 years or more continuous service of 240 days in a calendar year on December, 1993 shall be appointed as Work Charge employee w.e.f. Jan., 1994 and shall be put in the time scale of pay applicable to the corresponding lowest grade in the Government" which is annexed as Annexure R-II.

Hence the present application is not maintainable in the present form and deserves to be dismissed on this ground alone.

Thus, admittedly the petitioner had initially joined the respondent-Department as a daily rated Beldar on 1.1.1990 and had worked as such upto February, 1994. Thereafter, he started working as Work Inspector w.e.f. 1.3.1994 till 21.9.2002, that is, for more than eight years when he was vested with the status of a work charged Beldar instead of Work Inspector, for which he was legally entitled in the light of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and Others, and this Court in Gauri Dutt and others versus State of H.P., Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366.

In view of the above, if on facts the case of the petitioner is covered under the judgments referred to hereinabove in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and Others, and Gauri Dutt and others versus State of H.P., Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366 and the same have attained finality and have been implemented and the petitioner is similarly situate, he shall also be treated similarly without any discrimination and benefit of the said judgments along with consequential benefits, if any, shall be extended to him within three months from the date of production of copies of this judgment and the judgments referred to hereinabove by the petitioner before the respondents/competent authority.

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