BISHAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER had been engaged as Beldar on daily wages in the year 1989. He had been continuously working with the Respondent as Beldar, on daily wages, till 3.8.1994. On 4.8.1994, a case, under Section 376 Indian Penal Code was registered against the Petitioner and three -four other persons. Petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, which was granted to him on 5.9.1994, per his own case. He claims to have been acquitted in the criminal case in the year 1996.

(2.) PETITIONER 'scase is that when criminal case, under Section 376 Indian Penal Code had been registered against him, his name was removed from the muster -roll and his services were discontinued. Though he has given the date of discontinuation of his service as 4.8.1994, in the notices, copies Annexures R -1 and R -II, which he served upon the Respondents (R -I was served in the year 1994 and R -II in the year 2002), there is no mention of the date of the alleged discontinuation of services of the Petitioner. He was re -engaged, per his own claim in December, 1994 and ever since he has been continuously working with more than 240 days in every calendar year. According to Petitioner, there is shortfall of 17 days, during the year 1994 and this shortfall is alleged to be on account of discontinuation of his services by the Respondents. Alleged discontinuation is said to be illegal, arbitrary and, hence, shortfall of 17 days, according to the Petitioner, is required to be ignored. Petitioner claims confirmation of work -charge status, on completion of 10 years service, to be counted from the year 1990, when he joined as Beldar.

(3.) I have heard Learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record.