IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.103 of 2024 Date of Decision: 12.8.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sheetla Devi ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Ms. Parul Negi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Issue raised in the petition at hand is with regard to conferment of work charge status to daily wage employee after his/her having completed eight years of daily wage service with 240 days in each calendar year. 2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 2.7.2022, whereby representation having been filed by the petitioner in terms of order dated 30.3.2022, passed by Hon’ble Principal Division Bench in CWP No. 1553 of 2022, titled as Sheetla Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., for conferment of work charge status came to be rejected in view of ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Division - 2 - Bench in LPA No. 76 of 2016 titled Shyam Lal v. State of Himachal Pradesh, wherein it has been held that work charge status / regularization is not automatic, but subject to availability of sanctioned posts that too, under the approved government regularization policy. 3. Now since it is not in dispute rather admitted fact that Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, titled State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Surajmani and others, decided on 06.02.2025, has held that daily wage employee shall be entitled to work charge status on his/her having completed eight years continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in each calendar year, order dated 2.7.2022, deserves to be set-aside and with further direction to the respondents to consider case of the petitioner for grant of work charge status afresh in terms of mandate contained in the afore case of Surajmani (supra). 4. If the reply filed by the respondents under signature of Superintending Engineer 4th Circle HPPWD Shimla is perused in its entirety, case of the petitioner has been rejected taking note of the fact that SLP having been filed by the respondent-State in Surajmani (supra) is still pending adjudication. Now since it is not in dispute that SLP filed by the respondent-State was finally decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court and direction stands issued to the respondents to grant work charge status to daily wage employees, who have - 3 - completed eight years service with 240 days in each calendar year, prayer made in the instant petition, deserves to be allowed. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 2.7.2022 is quashed and set-aside with further direction to the respondents to consider and decide case of the petitioner in light of Surajmani (supra). Needless to say, in terms of mandate contained in Surajmani (supra), petitioner shall be entitled for monetary benefits on notional basis, but afore period shall be definitely counted for the purpose of regularization in terms of policy of regularization framed by Government of Himachal Pradesh. Since petitioner has been fighting for her rightful claim for years together, this court hopes and trusts that needful shall be done by the authority concerned within four weeks. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any. August 12, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge