SHIV RAJ Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was engaged, as daily waged Mortar Mate with the respondents-department, w.e.f. January, 1989. Though, from the initial date of engagement of the petitioner he worked as Mortar Mate, however, during October, 1989 to November, 1990, his designation has been shown as Chowkidar and Beldar, i.e. Class-IV posts, but w.e.f. December, 1990 to 13/3/2000, he again worked as Class-III on different posts and lastly the respondents have regularized his services, vide office letter dtd. 26/4/2000, w.e.f. 1/4/1998, as Beldar, instead of Mortar Mate/Plumber.

(2.) The petitioner has represented to the authorities for grant of work charge/regularization on the higher post(s), i.e. Mortar Mate/Work Inspector/Plumber, instead of Beldar, but, the authorities did not accede to the request of the petitioner. Accordingly, he filed original application before the erstwhile Tribunal, which was registered as OA No. 1786/2000. During the pendency of aforesaid case, the officers of the department pressurized the petitioner and also assured him that they are considering his case for grant of higher status from back date, thus, the applicant withdrew his application. However, despite assurance given by the respondents, they have not fulfilled their promise. The petitioner has also made repeated representations to the respondents for grant of work charge status on the higher post, but the respondents have not considered his case. Consequently, the petitioner filed a civil writ petition before this Court, which was registered as CWP No. 5105/2010 and was disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2 to examine the matter in the light of the decision in Gauri Dutt and Ors. Vs. State of H.P. within a period of two months from the date of production of copy of the judgment.

(3.) In view of the directions passed by this Court, the petitioner has submitted copy of judgment to respondent No. 2. However, the respondents vide office order dtd. 29/4/2011 regularized the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 4/1/2006, instead of 1/1/2000 as per Mool Raj Upadhaya and Gauri Dutt's case. In the said office order it has also been mentioned that the earlier appointment as Beldar w.e.f. 1/4/1998 shall now stands withdrawn and the excess pay so drawn by him w.e.f. 1/4/1998 as regular Beldar minus wages of Plumber for the said period is liable to be recovered in accordance with law from him after re-fixing the pay as Plumber.