IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.12295 of 2025 Decided on 07th July 2026 Yashodhar Sharma …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? Yes For the petitioner: Mr. Ramesh K. Kaundal, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajpal Thakur, Additional Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) The respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 01.04.2024 as the petitioner has already completed required four years service on 11.11.2023. ii) The respondents may kindly be directed to pay the arrears of regular pay of the post w.e.f. 01.04.2024 to date within a time bound period. iii) The respondents may kindly also be directed to pay interest on the wrongly withheld regularization and regular pay for the period from 01.04.2024 to the date of actual payment.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was engaged as a Driver in the Directorate of Health Safety and Regulations 2 on daily wage basis on 11.11.2019. The formal order of his appointment was issued on 15.11.2019 (Annexure P-1). The reason why the appointment was offered to the petitioner was that one Sh. Uday Singh, who was engaged as a Driver by the Department had unfortunately expired. It is further the case of the petitioner that he submitted his joining report on 13.01.2020. According to him, as he has completed more than 4 years continuous service as from the date of his engagement with 240 days in each calendar year, therefore, he has a right of being regularized in terms of the decision of the Government of Himachal Pradesh taken vide Annexure P-3, dated 01.12.2023, which provides that daily wage employees, who have completed four years of service as on 31.03.2024 with 240 days of continuous service in a calendar year, are to be regularized. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the petitioner fulfilling the eligibility criteria for being regularized in terms of instructions dated 02.12.2023, his services are not being regularized by the respondents. 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the fact that the petitioner was engaged as a daily wage worker in terms of Annexure P-1 and he fulfills the eligibility criteria for being regularized against the post of Driver, in terms of the Recruitment and Promotions Rules, Annexure P-5, his services are not being regularized, which act of the respondents is arbitrary and bad in law 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General referred to the reply filed by the Department and submitted that the petitioner was engaged on account of a post lying vacant due to the demise of Sh. Uday Singh, who was serving against one sanctioned post of Driver in the Directorate of Health Safety and Regulations. He contended that the services of the petitioner were hired on 15.11.2019, on daily wage basis till a regular Driver was appointed after the approval from the higher authority in terms of Rule 10 of the Rules and Regulations of the Himachal Pradesh Society for Health Safety and Regulations. By referring to the Annexures appended with the reply, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the petitioner is an employee of the Society concerned. 4 He further submitted that in terms of the Memorandum of Association of the Society in general and Clause-10 particularly thereof, the Society independently was to recruit its new staff whether on regular basis, contractual basis or temporary basis etc., including daily wage basis only with the prior approval of the State Government. Therefore, such staff shall be the Societies staff and not the Government staff. He submitted that in terms of the memorandum of association, there was to be no permanent absorption of the Societies staff in the Department and in the event of the dissolution of the Societies, the services of the employees of the Societies were to be automatically dispensed with. He submitted that in the backdrop of this, the petitioner cannot take advantage of the instructions being relied upon by him and he indeed was engaged by the Society in the facts and circumstances mentioned in the reply, he has no right of regularization. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned Additional Advocate General and have also carefully gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith. 5 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is serving on daily wage as a Driver. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as such with the Directorate of Health Safety and Regulation, whereas, the stand of respondents is that he was engaged as such with the Himachal Pradesh Society for Health Safety and Regulations. 8. The appointment letter of the petitioner is appended with the petition as Annexure P- and, the same reads as under:- “Directorate of Health Safety & Regulation Himachal Pradesh Shimla-02 No.HSR-H(Society Vehicle)943/2019 dated Shimla 02 the OFFICE ORDER Sh. Yashodhar Sharma is engaged as Driver on daily wage basis to ply newly purchased vehicle bearing temporary No.HP/63/TMP/2019/4158 dated 11.11.2019 till the regular driver is engaged deputed for the purpose subject to the approval of Chairman-cum- Additional Chief Secretary (Health) to the Govt. Of H.P. Sd/- (Dr N. K. Lath) IAS Director Health Safety & Regulation Himachal Pradesh Shimla-2 Endst No. as above-9472-74 Dated 15 Nov. 2019 Copy to 6 1. The Chairman HP HSR society cum Additional Chief Secretary (Health) t the Govt. of H.P. for information and approval please. 2. The Transport Officer of this Dirctorate for information. 3. Sh. Yashodhar Sharma Driver with the direction to provide separate driver for plying his vehicle No.HP-015-1829 Sd/- (Dr N. K. Lath) IAS Director Health Safety & Regulation Himachal Pradesh Shimla-2.” 9. A perusal of this office order demonstrates that the petitioner was engaged as a Driver on daily wage basis to drive a newly purchased vehicle till the regular Driver was engaged/deputed for the said purpose, subject to the approval of Chairman-cum-Additional Chief Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The office order, in terms whereof, the petitioner was engaged as a Driver was issued by the Director, Health Safety and Regulation, Himachal Pradesh. The above demonstrates that the appointment of the petitioner was by the Director, Health Safety and Regulation, Himachal Pradesh, subject to the approval of the Chairman-cum- 7 Additional Chief Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. 10. The very fact that the petitioner since the year 2020 till date is serving as a Driver on daily wage basis demonstrates that the appointment of the petitioner which was made by the Director concerned was approved by the Chairman-cum- Additional Chief Secretary (Health) is of permanent nature. It is also evident from Annexure P-1 that though the petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis as a Driver on a newly purchased vehicle, but, it was mentioned in the said order that the appointment of the petitioner on daily wage basis was till a regular Driver was engaged/deputed for the purpose in issue. This means, that actually the petitioner was engaged though on daily wage basis, but, against a regularly sanctioned post. Now, the reason that led to the appointment of the petitioner is also evident from the pleadings and the same is that his appointment was necessitated on account of the unfortunate demise of the Driver, who was actually deployed with the Department i.e. one Mr. Uday Singh. 8 11. Therefore, in this backdrop, the contention of the Sate that the petitioner was engaged by the Society etc., and, therefore, he is not entitled for regularization, does not convince the Court. It is again observed that the appointment of the petitioner on daily wage basis, but, against a regular post of a Driver was necessitated by the demise of a regularly serving Driver, Mr. Uday Singh. The appointment letter of the petitioner itself is self-speaking that the engagement of the petitioner was on daily wage basis and was until a regular driver was engaged or deputed for the said purpose. Fact of the matter is that till date, no regular Driver has been appointed or recruited to perform the duties which the petitioner is performing and as a result thereof, the petitioner continues to perform the duties of a Driver, though on daily wage basis. 12. Now in terms of Annexure P-3, which are the instructions issued by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, daily wage workers, who were to complete four years continuous service as on 31.03.2024, were to be regularized subject to the terms and conditions mentioned therein, which included the conditions of completion of four 9 years of continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in a calendar year etc. It is not in dispute that after appointment was offered to the petitioner in terms of Annexure P-1, he joined on daily wage basis w.e.f. 13.01.2020. As from the said date, he has completed four years on daily wage service on 13.01.2024. It is specifically averred by the petitioner in Para-6 of the petition that he had completed more than 240 days in each calendar year as from the date of his engagement on daily wage basis. A perusal of the reply filed by the State demonstrates that there is no denial to the said averments made in the writ petition. 13. Similarly, the reference of the appointment order of the petitioner is made in Para-4 of the writ petition and in reply to Para-4 of the writ petition, there is no denial that indeed the petitioner was offered appointment in terms of Annexure P-1. If for a minute, the contention of the Department is to be believed that the petitioner was indeed engaged by the Society, then, there ought to have been on record an appointment offer made to the petitioner by the Society. However, there is no such communication on record. It is also not the case of the 10 Department that the petitioner indeed was not engaged on the strength of Annexure P-1, which as per the petitioner was his appointment letter. 14. Therefore, the above facts clearly demonstrate that not only the petitioner was engaged as a daily wager against a regular post, but, after completion of four years of service on the said post with 240 days in each calendar year, he indeed is entitled for regularization in terms of instructions issued by the Government dated 02.12.2023, Annexure P-3. 15. At this stage, this Court would also like to make an observation with regard to the contention of the State qua the engagement of the petitioner by the Society. The Society which as per the Department is the employer of the petitioner is not a private Society. This Society in terms of Annexure R-2/1, which is the memorandum of association of the Society, is a Society wholly owned and controlled by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The objectives of the establishment of the Society are to facilitate the implementation of the provisions of the acts related to Health Safety and Regulations in Himachal Pradesh and various project related thereto sanctioned/assigned either 11 by the Central Government or the State Government. The Ex- Officio Members of the said Society are Secretary (Heath) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, who is the President of the Society, Director Health Service, HP, Mission Director NRMH, Director Medical Education, Director Dental Education, OSD Health Safety and Regulations, Principal, State Health Training Institute Parimahal, State Drug Controller and Director Health Safety and Regulations are the members. 16. The above, thus, clearly demonstrates that the Society is nothing but an extended arm of the State Government, which has been constituted to carry out the objectives as standards mentioned in the memorandum of association. Therefore, the Society is also other Authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and even if the contention of the Department is to be believed that the petitioner was indeed engaged by the Society, then also, the respondents in the garb of the so called appointment of the petitioner by the Society cannot deny regularization to the petitioner. 12 17. Accordingly, in light of the above observations, this petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner in terms of Annexure P-3, as from the date of completion of four years of service on daily wage basis with 240 days in each calendar year. 18. In the light of the fact that in terms of Annexure P-1, the appointment of the petitioner was against a vacant post, the regularization of the petitioner upon completion of four years of service will not be delayed on the ground of non-availability of post. Further, as the petitioner has approached this Court only in the year 2025 though the regularization of the petitioner shall be as from the date when he complete four years of service, but this will be notional and actual monetary benefit will be given to the petitioner as from the date of filing of the writ petition. 19. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 07, 2026 (Vinod)