MULTAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. D.P. Gupta, learned vice counsel for the petitioner submits that the present lis is squarely covered by the judgment dated 29.12.2009, rendered by this Court in Om Dutt versus State of H.P. and others, CWP(T) No. 2492 of 2008 (O.A. No. 2104/1999). According to him, his client should have been appointed as Forest Guard and not as Timber Watcher.

(2.) MR. P.M. Negi, learned Deputy Advocate General, on the basis of the reply filed submits that petitioner has submitted his joining report to respondent No. 4 on 24.02.1996 as Resin Watcher/Timber Watcher and his services were also regularized as Timber Watcher. In these circumstances, the petitioner cannot be deemed to have been appointed as Forest Guard. 2. Accordingly, the petition is partly allowed. It is held that petitioner was Timber Watcher of H.P. Government on appointed day, i.e.,11.03.1995 under the Act and continued as such till he retired. The petitioner was entitled to salary as was payable to Timber Watcher in the H.P. Government on 11.3.1995 and thereafter. The petitioner is also entitled to counting of his entire service rendered by him in the erstwhile Kutlehar Forest Management till his retirement for purposes of pay fixation, seniority and retrial benefits in accordance with Section 8 of the Himachal Pradesh Kutlehar Forest (Acquisition of Management) Act, 1992. The respondent-State is directed to calculate the arrears payable to petitioner in accordance with the judgment and pay the same to the petitioner within a period of six months from today after adjusting payments which have already been made to the petitioner on account of his retirement, failing which, the petitioner shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% on such arrears till payment. The petition is disposed of on above terms.