IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 14452 of 2025 Decided on: 09.09.2025 _________________________________________________________________ Bhagat Ram ....Petitioner Versus HPSEBL & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Bonit Prakash, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Vandana Misra, Advocate. ________________________________________________________________ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Ms. Vandana Misra, learned counsel, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner’s case is that he was engaged as daily waged Beldar/T-Mate in the respondent-Board in August 2002. His services were regularized in August 2007. He retired from service in March 2024. According to the petitioner, he has to be construed as temporary employee in the regular establishment of the respondents from the date of his initial appointment as per respondents’ standing orders 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - issued in the year 1985. 3. As per the standing order, there is no post of daily wager in the Board and the workmen start as work charge/regular/casual employee. Petitioner, accordingly claims that the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 are applicable to the respondent-Board and his entire service from the date of his initial appointment till regularization is to be treated as temporary service. The petitioner’s date of appointment is to be taken as August 2002 for the purpose of pensionary benefits. Petitioner, in view of this, falls under Old Pension Scheme, 1972. It is seen from the case file that petitioner, presentably aged 61 years, has never represented to the respondent-Board. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner would be content in case he is permitted to file representation to the respondent/Competent Authority for redressal of his grievances and the respondents/Competent Authority is directed to decide the same within a time bound schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to this prayer. - 3 - 5. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed by permitting the petitioner to file representation within two weeks, which shall be decided by the respondents /Competent Authority within six weeks from the date of receipt of the same, in accordance with law and also keeping in view the aforesaid judgment. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge September 09, 2025 R.Atal