Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2024 DAILYLAW 551 (HP)

RAMAN KUMAR v. STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/7162/2024 · 2026-01-01

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7162/2024 Decided on: 01.01.2026 Raman Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Angrez Kapoor, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive relief: - “(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize/grant work charge status of the service of petitioner immediately after completion of eight years of service as a daily waged worker/DPL, w.e.f. 31.12.2006 instead of 31.12.2007 (31.03.2008). (ii) That the writ in the nature of certiorari be issued and Annexure P-2 dated 16.04.2010 may kindly be quashed and set aside. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 (iii) That the arrears, seniority and all others consequential benefits w.e.f. completion of 8 years with interest may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition, grievance of the petitioner and the relief prayed for has essentially been adjudicated upon in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to examine the case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter and notwithstanding with the order at Annexure P-2, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment by passing appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 1st January, 2026(rohit) 2 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025