MANSHA RAM Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in the petition have prayed for quashing of Annexure P -2 dated 25.2.2008 or in the alternative prayer has been made that respondents may be directed to grant the benefit of work -charge status to all the petitioners with effect from the date they have completed 10 years of service with all consequential benefits such as pay fixation, seniority and arrears of pay. The learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that petitioners No.12,19 and 20 were engaged in the year 1996 and therefore, their cases are separate and has not pressed petition on behalf of petitioners No.12,19 and 20.

(2.) THE brief facts as per petitioners are that they were engaged as beldars in the Horticulture Department. The petitioners have given their dates of engagement and regularization in the memo of parties. The better course was that such dates should have been given in the main body of the petition but without going into the technicality it is the case of the petitioners that they were engaged and regularized as follows: -

(3.) THE Government of Himachal Pradesh in February, 2008 vide Annexure P -2 has given the work -charge status to the employees of PWD and IPH upto 31.12.2003 but the employees who are serving in Department of Horticulture and similarly situated were not covered by the said notification which is discriminatory and arbitrary. The petitioners are also entitled to the work -charge status with all consequential benefits in accordance with Mool Raj Upadhyaya supra.