SATINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF H. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since, a binding and conclusive judgment, affirmed up to the Hon'ble Apex Court, as, rendered in CWP No. 2735 of 2010 titled as Rakesh Kumar vs. State of H.P and others, (a) and, with a declaration of a law therein, hence bestowing an entitlement, upon, workmen, upon, theirs rendering 8 years of apposite service, to stake claim(s) towards conferment, of, work charge status, upon, them, has been averred in the writ petition, to become breached, (b) thereupon, the writ petitioner seeks conferment, of, the afore status upon him, after impugned Annexure P-1, being quashed and set aside.

(2.) In the reply to the writ petition, as, becomes meted, by the respondents, though therein occurs no denial, vis-a-vis, the writ petitioner's completing 8 years of daily waged service, up to 31.12.2002, yet the making of the impugned annexure, is attempted, to be vindicated rather solitarily on the ground vis-a-vis the department of Fisheries, not becoming covered, under, Annexure R1.

(3.) Apparently hence the completion, of, the requisite period, of 8 years of continuous service, by the writ petitioner, on a daily waged basis, under the respondents, does not come, under any contest. Though the apt legal corollary thereof is vis-a-vis the writ petitioner becoming entitled, to, the benefit(s), of, the binding and conclusive judgment hence rendered in Rakesh Kumar case supra, (a) and, wherethrough an entitlement became visited, upon, the afore workman, to claim conferment of work charge status upon him, by the respondents, (b) yet the vigour of the afore made declining plea, is, to be tested. However, the potency thereof becomes straightway emaciated, through, the falsity, of, the afore imminently pleaded fact, qua, Annexure R-1 not reflecting, vis-a-vis, the Department of Fisheries, whereunderwhom the writ petitioner is serving, becoming not mentioned therein, (c) inasmuch, as, since the afore Annexure became issued in pursuance to a binding and conclusive declaration of law, made in Rakesh Kumar case, wherethrough the afore entitlement became bestowed, upon, the writ petitioner, (d) thereupon the afore declaration of law warrants reverence being meted thereto, dehors non-mentioning, of, the Fisheries Department, in, Annexure R-1 (e) especially when Annexure R-1, is, made only in pursuance to, a, binding and conclusive verdict made in Rakesh Kumar Case supra, and, also with Department of Fisheries, being one of the wings or an agency, of, the Government of Himachal Pradesh, and, conspicuously also when qua wherewith no exception, is, carved in Rakesh Kumar Case supra.