2025:HHC:46531 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWPOA No.2135 of 2019 Decided on : 19.12.2025 __________________________________________________________ Jagdish Chand .....Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioner: Mr. Chandranarayana Singh and Mr. Anshul Gandhi, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Navlesh Verma, Additional Advocate General. Ranjan Sharma, Judge Petitioner, Jagdish Chand, had filed CWP No.1119 of 2013 before this Court; and on establishment of Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, the matter was transferred to the said Tribunal; and now upon abolition, the matter stood transferred to this Court, as CWPOA No.2135 of 2019, seeking the following relief:- “13 (a) Issue a writ of mandamus other appropriate writ order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit directing the respondents no.2 & 3 to treat the petitioner as Electrician Gr.II w.e.f. 6.4.1992 with all consequential benefits, in terms of the judgment dated 29.7.2008 in CWP No.585/2005.” 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:46531 FACTUAL MATRIX: 2. Case as set up by Learned Counsel is that the petitioner was engaged as Wireman on daily wages on 01.01.1985 and had rendered continuous service with 240 days for more ten years. It is averred that w.e.f. 01.03.1995, the petitioner was issued Muster Roll of Electrical Mistry by the Respondents. It is further averred that though the petitioner had a right to be granted work charge status/ regularization as Wireman/Electrical Mistry but, the Respondents granted work charge status to the petitioner as T-Mate w.e.f. 01.01.1995 and feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed an Original Application No.14 of 1996, which was dismissed by the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal on 03.12.2004. This Order was challenged by the petitioner in CWP No.585 of 2005 [Jagdish Chand Versus State of H.P. & anr.] decided on 29.07.2008], whereby, the writ petition was allowed and the Respondents were directed to treat the petitioner as Wireman/Electrical Mistry w.e.f. 01.01.1995 and Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 with all 3 2025:HHC:46531 consequential benefits. 2(i). It is averred that pursuant to the judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1], Chief Engineer [Electrical], H.P.P.W.D. Shimla, passed an order dated 01.11.2008 [Annexure P-4], in supersession of earlier orders, regularizing the petitioner on post of Electrician Gr II w.e.f. 01.01.1995 [now Junior Technician] in pay scale of Rs.950-1800/- with all consequential benefits. 2(ii). Now, the grievance is that after having been regularized as Electrician Gr. II w.e.f. 01.01.1995 vide orders dated 01.11.2008 [Annexure P-4] petitioner further submitted a representation dated 05.09.2011 [Annexure P-5] that as per judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1], petitioner was entitled for regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992, but the Respondents have not granted regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 in terms of the judgment and the same has resulted in depriving the petitioner of the higher status and higher pay scale and other service benefits. STAND OF RESPONDENTS IN REPLY-AFFIDAVIT: 4 2025:HHC:46531 3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice on 21.03.2013, Respondents filed Reply-Affidavit dated 24.06.2013 of Superintending Engineer, Electrical Circle, HPPWD, Shimla. 3(i). Perusal of Reply-Affidavit indicates that pursuant to the judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1], the petitioner was granted work charge status as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 01.01.1995 vide order dated 01.11.2008 [Annexure P-4]. Reply-Affidavit further indicates that so far as the claim of the petitioner for regularization w.e.f. 06.04.1992 is concerned, the same is not tenable in view of the fact that date “06.04.1992” appears to be typographic error in the said judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1] in view of the fact that State Government had issued a notification on 06.04.1995 [Annexure A-5] clubbing categories of work charged Staff/work charged converted into regular establishment, whereby, the post of Wireman/Electrical Mistry was clubbed with the post of Electrician Grade-II on 06.04.1995; and incumbents who were Wiremen/Electrical Mistry were to be re-designated as Electrician Grade II in 5 2025:HHC:46531 terms of Notification dated 06.04.1995 as referred to above. The stand of the Respondent-Department is that the date “06.04.1992” contained in judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1] was typographic error was reiterated. In this backdrop, prayer was made for dismissing the writ petition. REJOINDER BY PETITIONER: 4. In rejoinder, the petitioner pleaded that one Shri Het Ram had worked as Wireman/Electrical Mistry had been granted the benefit of regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 1992 by the Respondents vide Annexure P-5 (colly) and therefore, the petitioner also claimed parity with one Shri Het Ram, as aforesaid. ORDER PASSED BY THIS COURT TO ASCERTAIN PARITY WITH HET RAM: 5. During pendency of the instant petition, this Court had passed orders on 30.11.2023 to assert as to whether any incumbent, including Shri Het Ram had allegedly worked as Wireman/Electrical Mistry had been regularized by way of re-designation or otherwise as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 [or during the year 1992] as pleaded in Rejoinder 6 2025:HHC:46531 and State Authorities were also directed to furnish Instructions in the matter. Upon listing of the matter on 10.10.2025, the Respondents were granted further time to furnish Instructions in terms of earlier orders. On 20.11.2025, Learned State Counsel has furnished Instructions dated 06.11.2025 stating therein that Shri Het Ram was re-designated as Electrician Grade II alongwith other similar persons in terms of the Notification dated 06.04.1995 [Annexure R-5 with Reply to OA] with further stand that no benefits were given to said Shri Het Ram w.e.f. 06.04.1992, as alleged by the petitioner. Instructions dated 06.11.2025 reads as under:- “HIMACHAL PRADESH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Office of the Superintending Engineer, 1st Electrical Circle, HPPWD, Kasumpti, Shimla09 (HP) Phone: 01772620055, Fax: 01772621494,e-mail: se-ele-hp@nic.in, Web: www.hppwd.gov.in No.PW-SE-Elect.-CWPOA No.2135 (Jagdish)-1764-66 Dated:- 06.11.2025 To The Ld. Advocate General, HP High Court, Shimla-1 Subject:- CWPOA No.2135/2019-titled as Jagdish Chand V/S State of HP & others. Sir, 7 2025:HHC:46531 I have the honor to invite your kind attention towards subject cited matter which has been ordered to be listed on 12.11.2025 before the Hon'ble High Court of H.P. Shimla in terms of the order passed on 10.10.2025. In this regard, it is submitted that Sh. Het Ram (T. Mate) was regularized by the respondents w.e.f. 01.01.1995 vide Annexure-A-1. Further on clubbing of various categories by the Govt. vide notification dated 06.04.1995, the said Sh. Het Ram was re-designated as Electrician Grade-II vide Annexure-A-2 alongwith all similar situated persons. No benefits were given to Sh. Het Ram w.e.f. 06.04.1992 as alleged by the petitioner. All benefits have been given as per notification 06.04.1995 only to all similar person. The contention of the petitioner is without any basis & contrary to records. You are therefore, requested to apprise the Hon'ble Court accordingly on the next date of hearing please. Sd/- Superintending Engineer, 1st Electrical Circle, HPPWD, Shimla-171009.” 6. Heard, Mr. Mr. Chandranarayana Singh and Mr. Anshul Gandhi, Advocates, for the petitioner and Mr. Navlesh Verma, Additional Advocate General, for the Respondents. ANALYSIS: 7. Taking into account the entirety of facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to accept the prayer of the petitioner for regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992, for the following reasons:- 8 2025:HHC:46531 7(i). Claim of the petitioner for regularization as Electrician Grade-II is based on the judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1] passed by this Court in CWP No.585 of 2005, directing the State Authorities to treat the petitioner as Wireman/Electrician Grade II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 with all consequential benefits. The judgment dated 29.07.2008 reads as under: “In view of the above discussion, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to treat the petitioner/employee as Wireman/ Electrical Mistry w.e.f. 1.1.1995 and as Electrician Grade II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 with all consequential benefits.” Perusal of the judgement indicates that category of Wireman/Electrical Mistry was clubbed with the post of Electrician Grade II on 06.04.1995 and upon clubbing the Wireman/Electrical Mistry were entitled for re-designation as Electrician Grade II w.e.f. 06.04.1995 and not w.e.f. 06.04.1992 as has been erroneously mentioned in the said judgment. 7(ii). Even perusal of the Notification dated 06.04.1995 [Annexure R-5 at pages 54-55 of paper book], negates the claim of the petitioner, for the reason, that the category of Electrician Grade-II and Electrical Mistry [at Serial Nos.50 & 51] were 9 2025:HHC:46531 clubbed as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1995 by the State Authorities. The operative part of the judgment dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1], which directs to grant the benefit of redesignation to the petitioner as Electrical Mistry/Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 is not supported by any notification or order or declaration of law and the date 06.04.1992 is not in consonance with the Notification dated 06.04.1995 [Annexure R-5], which reads as under: Government of Himachal Pradesh Public Works Department. Endst.No. PBW-2B(2)30/86 dated Shimla 171002 the 6th April, 1995 NOTIFICATION The Governor, Himachal Pradesh, is pleased to club the following categories of work charged/work charged brought in to regular cadre in the Department of Public Works Himachal Pradesh as under: Sr.No. Old Categories. New Categories after clubbing. Pay Scale. 1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 3. Beldar Helper Khalaci Beldar 770-1356 4 to 49 Not Relevant. - - 50. 51. Electrician Grade-II Electrical Mistry 24) Electrician Grade-II 950-1800 52 to 89 Not Relevant. - - For the purpose of appointment/promotion, a 10 2025:HHC:46531 combined seniority list will be maintained at State/Circle/Divisional level of eligible incumbent with reference to their date of appointment in their respective feeder category without disturbing their unit wise inter-se seniority. Sd/- P.S.Rana. Commissioner-Cum-Secretary (PW) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh 7(iii). The plea of the petitioner that benefit of regularization as Electrician Grade-II was given w.e.f. 1992 to one Shri Het Ram [as per Rejoinder at page 62 of paper book] was specifically denied by the State Authorities in the Instructions dated 06.11.2025 as reproduced hereinabove, stating that Shri Het Ram was re-designated as Electrician Grade-II alongwith other similar persons in terms of the Notification dated 06.04.1995 and no benefit has been given to Shri Het Ram w.e.f. 06.04.1992 as alleged by the petitioner. Thus, once the claim of the petitioner, seeking parity with said Shri Het Ram is denied on facts by the Respondents, therefore, the claim of parity is not tenable. Even during the course of hearing, Learned Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to assert and establish any right for redesignation and/or regularization as Electrician Grade-II from 06.04.1992, on the basis of any 11 2025:HHC:46531 Government Notification or declaration of law. Unless a right is asserted or established by the petitioner for regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 on the basis of notification, order or declaration of law, therefore, a mere bald assertion will not confer any right merely on basis of inadvertently recorded dated 06.04.1992, in the judgement and thus the prayer cannot be acceded to by this Court. In view of above discussion, this Court is not inclined to accept the prayer of petitioner for redesignation and/or for regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992, which is not based on any Government Notification or declaration of law. Nothing has been placed on record to establish right of regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1992 as mentioned in the judgement. Right of regularization as Electrician Grade-II only accrues in terms of Notification dated 06.04.1995 [Annexure R-5], as discussed hereinabove. In these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter, except by reserving liberty to the petitioner to assert a right 12 2025:HHC:46531 for regularization as Electrician Grade-II a date prior to issuance of his regularization as Electrician Grade-II. 7(iv). Case needs to be examined from another angle. Once the petitioner was engaged as Wireman on daily wage basis w.e.f. 01.01.1985 and was issued Muster Roll of Electrical Mistry w.e.f. 01.03.1995 and the category of Wireman/Electrical Mistry was re-designated and clubbed as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 06.04.1995 [Annexure R-5], then, in terms of the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Mool Raj Upadhyaya Versus State of H.P. and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316, the petitioner was rightly accorded work charge status/regularization as Electrician Grade-II [now Junior Technician] from the date of completion of 10 years of daily wage service vide order dated 01.11.2008 [Annexure R-1 at page 27 of paper book] w.e.f. 01.01.1995. Grant of work charge status/regularization as Electrician Grade-II w.e.f. 01.01.1995 is approved in terms of the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mool Raj Upadhyaya [supra]. No ground is made out by the petitioner for granting work charge 13 2025:HHC:46531 status or regularization as Electrician Grade-II from a date prior to 01.01.1995 in the instant case. For reasons recorded hereinabove, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the instant matter and work charge/regularization granted to the petitioner as Electrician Grade-II [now Junior Electrician] vide order dated 01.11.2008 [Annexure R-1], w.e.f. 01.01.1995 conforms to the mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mool Raj Upadhyaya [supra], does not suffer from any illegality or perversity. 7(v). Claim of regularization of the petitioner as Electrician Grade-II from, 1992, seeking parity with said Shri Het Ram, who has not been granted regularization as Electrician Grade-II from 1992 but has been regularized/re-designated as Electrician Grade-II as per Notification dated 06.04.1995, is borne out from the Instructions dated 06.11.2025 [placed on record] by the State Authorities. The petitioner has not placed any material on record to rebut the Instructions dated 25.11.2025, as reproduced above. 8. No other point was argued/pressed. 14 2025:HHC:46531 CONCLUSION: 9. In view of above discussion, the instant petition is disallowed in the following terms: (i). Claim of the petitioner for redesignation and/or for regularizing as Electrician Grade- II w.e.f. 06.04.1992, being not based on any Government Notification or declaration of law, is declined; (ii). The findings recorded in the judgement dated 29.07.2008 [Annexure P-1] directing to grant regularization as Electrician w.e.f. 06.04.1992 being a typographical or inadvertent error not based on any Government notification or declaration of law will not confer any enforceable claim on the petitioner; (iii). Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to assert a right for work charge status/ regularization as Electrician Gr-II from an earlier date prior to 01.01.1995, in case, any such right exists in law, if so desires. (iv). Parties to bear respective costs. In aforesaid terms, instant petition stands disposed of alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge December 19, 2025 [Bhardwaj]