SH. RUP LAL S/O SH. BANSI RAM, R/O VILL. BURAHI, PO DASSEHRA DISTT. MANDI Vs. SH. RUP LAL S/O SH. BANSI RAM, R/O VILL. BURAHI, PO DASSEHRA DISTT. MANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition was initially filed before the erstwhile H.P. Administrative Tribunal and on its abolition, transferred to this Court for disposal in accordance with law. The reliefs claimed in this petition are as under: I That the respondents may kindly be directed to issue Work charge/ regularization order as Beldar in favour of applicants retrospectively w.e.f. 1st April, 2001 or on subsequent date/ from the date of creation of posts with its consequential benefits. II That respondent No. 2 Executive Engineer HP PWD B&R Mandi Divn. No. II may also kindly be directed to issue seniority list of daily rated Beldars/workers working under his Division and get the posts created for his Division as per policy for eligible workers. Petitioners have approached this Court by filing this petition for direction to the respondents to appoint them as beldars as work charge employees/ on regular basis, on the ground that they have completed eight years of continuous service on daily wage basis as Beldars as on 31.3.2001. It has also been claimed that the services of the persons similarly situated to them have since been regularized. However, they have been discriminated against in this behalf.

(2.) RESPONDENTS have filed the reply and contested the claim of the petitioners. In preliminary submissions, it is submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya v. State of H.P. and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316, services of several daily wage workers have been regularized, on completion of ten years or more continuous service, strictly in accordance with their seniority and subject to availability of posts. The services of the petitioners could not be regularized for want of sufficient number of sanctioned posts. However, no person junior to them has been regularized. The Policies, in the matter of regularization of the workers, like petitioners, Annexures R -1 and R -2, have also been brought on record. Reliance has also been placed on a judgment dated April 9, 2003, Annexure R -3 of this Court in State of H.P. v. Dhian Singh Alias Mohindru & Another, CWP No. 481 of 1995 and also instructions Annexures R -4 and R -5 issued by the State Government in the matter of regularization of the services of the workers, similarly situated to the petitioners. The Mandays Charts in respect of the petitioners have also been annexed to the reply as Annexure R -10.

(3.) ALTHOUGH , the petitioners have sought a direction to the respondents to appoint them as work charge employees/ on regular basis, yet during the course of arguments, learned counsel representing them, has restricted their claim to the extent of their appointment as work charge employees, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya's case cited (supra). Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to Annexure R -10, the Mandays Chart, which contains the factual position qua the services they rendered on daily wage basis with the respondents.