IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11908 of 2025 Decided on: 25th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Milap Chand …..Petitioner Versus Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Palampur .....Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Rana, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Prince Chauhan, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned Standing Counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner essentially seeks a direction to the respondent-Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya (in short ‘respondent-University’) to confer work charge status upon him on completion of his eight years of daily wage service. 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 According to the petitioner, he was engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in the respondent-University in the year 1991. He completed 240 days in each calendar year w.e.f. 1995. Services of the petitioner were regularized on 06.07.2008 as Beldar. Petitioner’s grievance is that he was entitled to work charge status on completion of his eight years of daily wage service, but this benefit has been wrongly denied to him by the respondent. 3. Relief qua conferment of work charge status on completion of eight years of service has been claimed on the strength of the decision rendered in Sarwan Kumar Versus Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur2, as affirmed in Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Versus Sarwan Kumar3, under the lead case State of HP and others Versus Surajmani and Anr.4 4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner placed on record copy of the decision rendered in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.5. Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Versus 2 O.A.(D) No.404 of 2018, decided on 20.03.2019 3 CWP No.1396 of 2019, decided on 12.01.2023 4 LPA No.165 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 12.01.2023 5 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected appeals on 06.02.2025 3 Sarwan Kumar6 was one of the matters connected and decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court alongwith the case of Surajmani5. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondent is directed to examine his case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondent is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent/ competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law laid down in Surajmani2 & Sarwan Kumar6 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within six weeks from today. Copy of the order so passed, be also communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 25, 2025 Judge Mukesh 6 Civil Appeal No.1859 of 2025, decided alongwith connected appeals on 06.02.2025