2025:HHC:25989-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.877 of 2022 Date of Decision: 04.08.2025 __________________________________________________________ Dhruv Chand …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Bhim Raj Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): CMP No.18582 of 2025 For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed and with the consent of parties, case at hand is taken up for hearing today itself. Application stands disposed of. CWP No.877 of 2022 2. By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs: “(i) That the Petitioner be considered for regularization after completion of 8 years of service. (ii) That the office order dated 23.03.2021 as Annexure P-3 may kindly be quashed and set-aside. (iii) That the arrears w.e.f. completion of 8 years with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2025:HHC:25989-DB 2 (iv) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. after completion of 8 years with 240 days in one calendar year.” 3. By way of filing reply to the petition, claim, as put forth by the petitioner, has been refuted by the respondents primarily on the ground that Department of Animal Husbandry is not a work charge establishment and as such, petitioner is not entitled for conferment of work charge status, but before case at hand could be heard and decided on its own merits, learned counsel representing the parties are ad idem that issue sought to be decided in the instant proceedings is no more res integra, rather stands duly adjudicated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Himachal Pradesh and Others vs. Surajmani and Another, Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided on 06.02.2025, along with connected civil appeals, wherein it has been reiterated that daily wage employee shall be entitled to work charge status on his/her completed eight years continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in each calendar years and as such, case of the petitioner is required to be considered afresh in light of law laid down therein. 4. 4. Having perused the averments contained in the petition, especially relief clause, vis-à-vis judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Surajmani case (supra), this Court finds that case of the petitioner is identical to the aforesaid case decided by Hon’ble Apex Court. Vide aforesaid judgment, this Court has already dealt with all the points raised in the instant petition and as such, respondents can be 2025:HHC:25989-DB 3 directed to decide the case of the petitioner afresh in light of the aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, notwithstanding the order dated 23.03.2021 (Annexure P-3), present petition is disposed of, with the direction to respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law laid down in Surajmani (supra), expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six weeks’ from today. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of along with pending application(s), if any. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 04, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)