Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9360 of 2024 Date of decision: 02.07.2025 Pawan Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate. For the respondent : Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That in view of settled position of law with respect to fictional breaks as is settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court and by this Hon’ble Court qua similarly situate persons vide annexure P- 1, respondents may be directed to regularize the period of fictional breaks of the petitioner as has been regularized by them with respect to similarly situate persons mentioned in Annexure P-1 and to bring the services of the petitioner on the rolls of work charged employees with effect from 1.10.2006 on completion of 08 years of service with 240 days in every calendar year and accordingly only regularize the services of the petitioner on availability of regular post and to fix the pay accordingly in the revised scales as are revised from time to time and to calculate and pay the arrears along with interest @ 9% p.a. and to start paying enhanced pay as has been fixed -2- from the ensuing month in the interest of law and justice. (ii) That directions may be given to the respondents to treat the petitioner exactly as similar as has been treated the persons mentioned in Annexures P-1 to P-3 and after ignoring fictional breaks/regularizing the said period, directions may be given to being the petitioner on the rolls of work charged on completion of 8 years of service on 1.10.2006 and then regularize his services and pay the arrears along with interest @ 9% p.a. as has been paid to the similarly situated employees and accordingly fix pay of the petitioner and start paying the said enhanced salary to the petitioner from ensuing month.” 2. Pursuant to several orders passed in this writ petition from time to time, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 25.06.2025 from the Additional Director, Ayush, H.P. along with appended documents, including office order passed by Director, Ayush, H.P. in case of the petitioner. In terms of the said office order, the petitioner has been granted work- charge status w.e.f. 04.09.2006 on his completing 8 years of continuous daily wage service on notional basis in accordance with decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.1. 1 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025 -3- 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the surviving grievance of the petitioner would be with respect to fixation of his pay in accordance with aforesaid office order. Learned Deputy Advocate General assures that pay fixation order in accordance with office order passed by the respondents in case of the petitioner shall be issued within four weeks from today and arrears due and admissible to the petitioner pursuant to the above office order and in accordance with law laid down in Surajmani1 shall be released in his favour within six weeks. 4. Taking note of aforesaid office order and submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, to also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 2nd July, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)