Vidya Devi vs Secretary, HPPWD and Others

Rajiv Sharma, J.—Petitioner''s husband was engaged on daily wage basis in the year 1987. He had completed ten years continuous service with 240 days in each calendar year from 1989 till 1998. Respondent-State had granted sanction on 12.1.2000 for the creation of posts of various categories of daily wage workers, who had completed nine years or more service as on 31.3.1998. Name of the Petitioner was also included in the list supplied by Respondents No. 4 and 5. Unfortunately, Petitioner''s husband died on 2.3.2000 and consequently, the Screening Committee did not consider his case for regularization. Since the Petitioner''s husband had completed ten years on 1.4.1998, the Screening Committee was only required to issue formal order of regularizing him with effect from 1.4.1998. Merely that the Petitioner''s husband has died, could not defeat his right to be regularized from back date. In this case, since the Petitioner''s husband was appointed before 31.12.1993, his case was required to be considered, as per the law laid down by their Lordships of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and Others, for conferment of work charge status. The conferment of work charge status on the Petitioner''s husband could have allowed him certain privileges and monetary benefits.

In normal circumstances, directions ought to have been issued, if the Petitioner was alive to consider his case for regularization as per Mool Raj Upadhaya''s case (supra). However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, he will be deemed to have been regularized with effect from 1.4.1998 since he had completed ten years'' continuous service with 240 days in each calendar year.

Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Petitioner''s husband is declared to be regularized with effect from 1.4.1998 with all the consequential benefits.