RAM BAHADUR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition has been filed on the following prayer: To direct the Respondents to withdraw the orders dated 8th July, 2005, Annexure A -2, whereby the services of the applicant have been regularized w.e.f. 4.10.2002 and further to restore the orders dated 7th July, 2005, Annexure A -1, whereby the services of the applicant have been regularized from the due date i.e. w.e.f. 1.4.1995.

(2.) IN reply, the Respondents have taken the following stand vide para 6(i) to (vii): Para 6(i to vii) In reply to these para 'sit is submitted that the applicant was engaged as casual labourer on daily wages on Muster Roll to carry out the Agricultural farm operations on the Vegetable Development Farm at Baritee in the Department of Agriculture. The applicant completed 240 days in a calendar year in different schemes/works and the applicant is a citizen of Nepal. The Govt. has taken the decision that a candidate for appointment to any service or post must be a citizen of India. A copy of the notification is annexed as Annexure R/1. Instead of this the applicant has been considered for the regularization of the basis of Govt. policy and in accordance with R & P Rules and who completed 10 years continuous service with minimum of 240 days in the calendar year. It is pertinent to submit that the applicant has been considered for regularization w.e.f. 01 -04 -1995 to 03 -10 -2002 purely on notional basis without any pay and allowances and he will be entitled for financial benefit w.e.f. 04 -10 -2002. The copy of order is annexed as Annexure R/II. In view of the judgment delivered by the Hon 'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Jai Devi Gupta V. State of HP reported in AIR 1998 SC 2819. That the arrears of the Govt./Department should be restricted for a period of three years only. A copy of which is enclosed as Annexure R/III. The applicant has been given the appointment w.e.f. 01 -04 -1995 on notional basis and the financial benefit has already been given of the applicant w.e.f. 04 -10 -2002 when the actual joining is 20 -07 -2005. Hence, the claim of the applicant is devoid of any merit and deserves to be dismissed in limine in the interest of justice.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , the matter was re -examined by the Respondents in the light of office memoranda dated 11.7.2000, Annexure R/1 and 15.1.2002, Annexure R/3 pursuant to which office order dated 22.2.2006, Annexure R/2 was issued whereby services of the Petitioner were regularized as Beldar 'purely on notional basis without any pay and allowances alongwith financial benefits w.e.f. 4.10.2002. ' However, to my mind the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered under judgment dated 27.7.2009 passed by this Court in CWP No. 1594/2008, Shri Man Singh V. State of H.P. and Ors. and the connected matters, text whereof is as under: Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these petitions, they have been taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by a common judgment.