2025:HHC:31479-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 5547 of 2020 Decided on: 21.07.2025 __________________________________________________________ State of H.P. and others ...Petitioners Versus Kartar Singh and others ….Respondents __ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting?. No. For the petitioners: Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. For the respondents: Respondents No.1(a) to 1(c) have been proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 03.04.2025. Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. Ranjan Sharma, Judge As prayed, de-linked from CWP No.2281 of 2020. 2. Petitioners-State Authorities have come up before this Court in the instant petition, assailing the Impugned Order dated 13.08.2018 [Annexure P-I] “hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Order” passed by Learned State Administrative Tribunal [now 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 2 - abolished] in O.A. No.4801 of 2018, In Re; Kartar Singh and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, whereby, the State Administrative Tribunal has directed the State Authorities to verify as to whether the case of the Respondents-Employees-Original Applicants were similar to the petitioners in CWP No.3111 of 2016, State of Himachal Pradesh versus Ashwani Kumar, decided on 10.05.2018 and upon examination, in case they were found to be similarly placed, then, directions were issued to extend them the benefit of the said order/judgement alongwith consequential benefits, if any, as per law within three months. FACTUAL MATRIX: 3. Respondents- Employees- Original Applicants have set up a case that they were engaged as Work Inspectors, Class-III on daily wage basis during the year 1994 and were regularized in the year 2006 and they are to be conferred work charge status from the date of completion of 8 years of continuous service, as such, with all benefits by placing reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in Ashwani Kumar [supra], in the above referred terms. 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 3 - STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES-PETITIONERS IN THE INSTANT WRIT PETITION: 4. State Authorities have assailed the order dated 13.08.2018 [Annexure P-1] passed by State Administrative Tribunal on the ground firstly, that the order is against the regularization policy; secondly, the work charge establishment in case of Class-III incumbents stood abolished on 19.06.2001 and, therefore, the work charge status cannot be extended and not admissible to the Respondents-Employees; thirdly, the judgement in the case of CWP No.2735 of 2010, In Re; Rakesh Kumar Versus State of H.P. & Ors. which was relied upon in case of CWP No. 3111 of 2016, State of Himachal Pradesh vs Ashwani Kumar, and modified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Himachal Pradesh versus Ashwani Kumar, [Civil Appeal No 5753 of 2019, decided on 22.07.2019] was a judgement in personam and was not a binding precedent and therefore, the benefit of these judgements cannot be extended to the Respondents- Employees- Original Applicants herein, who stood regularized on 29.12.2006; and lastly, the instant petition claiming work charge status was 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 4 - filed before the State Administrative Tribunal only in the year 2018 and was therefore, time barred and suffered from delay and laches. 5. Notably, the Impugned Order dated 13.08.2018 passed by State Administrative Tribunal assailed in instant writ petition was stayed by this Court on 03.12.2020. 6. During the pendency of the instant petition, Kartar Singh, Respondent No.1, is stated to have died and an application CMP(M) No. 1211 of 2024 was filed for bringing on record the legal heirs in the aforesaid application and notice was issued to the proposed legal heirs of deceased respondent No.1 but for want of appearance the legal representatives were proceeded against ex-parte on 3.4.2025. 7. Heard, Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Learned Deputy Advocate General, for the Petitioners-State and Mr. Sat Prakash, Learned Counsel, for Respondents No.2 and 3. However, Respondents No.1 (a) to 1 (c) have been proceeded against ex-parte, vide order dated 03.04.2025. 8. Upon listing of the petition, Learned 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 5 - Counsel appearing for the parties jointly represented that the matter in issue for according work charge status to daily wagers, including Class-III daily wagers, which included the Respondents-Original Applicants herein, is no longer res integra, in view of the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in State of Himachal Pradesh & Others versus Surajmani and Another [Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025 and other connected matters, decided on 06.02.2025], wherein, daily wagers have been held entitled for conferment of work charge status from the date of completion of 8 years of continuous daily wage service on “notional basis”. Based on identical factual and legal matrix, this Court has decided CWP No.2281 of 2020, In Re; State of H.P. & another Versus All Himachal P.W.D.- I.P.H. & Contractual Workers Union and another [originating from order passed by State Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.1077 of 2017], dealing with the similar claims/issues and therefore, the findings recorded therein shall, mutatis mutandis apply, to the claims/issues in the instant petition herein. 9. Besides, the above, the State Authorities- 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 6 - petitioners herein, have taken a decision on 07.01.2020 Annexure P-III deciding to grant work charge status to daily wagers including Class-III incumbents who have completed 8 years of continuous service with a minimum of 240 days prior to 31.05.2006. Based on the aforesaid decision dated 7.1.2020 [Annexure P-III], the State Authorities-petitioners have issued the office orders on 4.5.2020 [Annexure P-III(A), Annexure P-III(B) and Annexure P-III(C)] granting the work charge status to the Respondents 1 to 3 herein as Work Inspector(s), and accordingly, Kartar Singh was granted work charge status with higher pay fixation w.e.f. 01.01.2003, Karam Chand w.e.f. 01.01.2003 and Sarvjeet Singh w.e.f. 01.01.2002. CONCLUSION: 10. In above backdrop, once the claim of the Respondents-Employees was only with respect to grant/ conferment/restoration of work charge status in terms of the judgement in the case of Ashwani Kumar [supra], and this claim, stands approved by Hon’ble Supreme Court, recently in State of Himachal Pradesh & Others versus Surajmani and Another [Civil Appeal 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 7 - No. 1595 of 2025 and other connected matters, decided on 06.02.2025, entitling the Respondents-Employees herein, for work charge status from the date of completion of 8 years of continuous service, which was rightly extended to them, by the Petitioners- State Authorities by issuing the necessary orders on [4.5.2020, Annexure P-III(A), dated 01.05.2020 Annexure P-III(B) and dated 01.05.2020 Annexure P-III(C)] by the State Authorities, therefore, this Court upholds the entitlement of the Respondents-Employees herein for work charge status, with higher pay fixation benefits, on notional basis only, but without any past arrears, in terms of the directions contained in Para 11 of the judgement in the case of Surajmani [supra]. DIRECTIONS: 11. DIRECTIONS: 11. In view of the above discussion and for the reasons recorded hereinabove, instant petition is partly allowed in the following terms:- (i) Instant Writ Petition, i.e. CWP No.5547 of 2020, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh and others versus Kartar Singh and others is partly allowed; (ii) The Impugned Order dated 13.08.2018 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 8 - passed by Learned State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.4801 of 2018, In Re; Kartar Singh and others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh, so far as it relates to grant/restoration of work charge status to the Respondents- Employees- Original Applicants as Class- III employees from the date of completion of 8 years of continuous daily wage service from the due date, is upheld; (iii) Directions contained in Para-7 of the Impugned Order dated 13.08.2018 [Annexure P-1] entitling the Respondents- Employees-Original Applicants for work charge status with “all consequential benefits” shall stand modified by limiting relief to “notional benefits”, in the light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Surajmani [supra]. (iv) State Authorities shall not affect any recovery of past arrears, if any, released upon grant of work charge status vis-à-vis entitlement for notional benefits; till the State Authorities take a decision for recovery of excess amount, if any, in the light of the mandate in Para 11 of the judgement in the case of Surajmani [supra]. (v) State Authorities shall comply with the directions contained herein by 2025:HHC:31479-DB - 9 - granting/restoring/continuing the benefits to the Respondents-Employees including the legal heirs of deceased Respondent No.1, within six weeks, from the receipt of certified/ downloaded copy of this judgment; (vi) Parties to bear their respective costs. In the aforesaid terms, the instant appeal and all pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, shall stand disposed of, accordingly. (G.S. Sandhawalia) (Ranjan Sharma) Chief Justice Judge July 21, 2025 [Bhardwaj]