( 2025:HHC:31342 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1887 of 2019 Decided on: 11.09.2025 Sarestha Devi ....Petitioner Versus Union of India & others ....Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Ms. Vidushi Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral). The challenge in the present Civil Writ Petition is to the order dated 02.05.2018 (Annexure P-14) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh in OA No.060/00806/2016, wherein the Tribunal had dismissed the Original Application by coming to the conclusion that the conduct as such of the employee was regarding absent reports and show cause notices have been issued and there was willful absence from assigned duties at the MI Room in the hospital. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Reference was made to the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) which while giving enhanced scales to all employees, whereby re-structuring had been done in order to extract better work in return for better and higher pay scales and that the post would be re-designated as Multi Tasking Staff (MTS) and required to do 8 hours of work. Therefore the arguments raised that 2 hours work in the MI Room was not justified was rejected, keeping in view the appointment and duties were claimed to be that for a Messenger. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has again argued that since the petitioner was appointed as Messenger and the work which has been taken from her in the MI Room was not part of her assignment as such is without any basis. 4. The petitioner has been appointed on compassionate ground in the year 1998 and having taken the benefits of the enhanced pay-scales of 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC), instead of doing the work diligently, she is raising the issues of the assignment of work to the Civilian Messenger. 5. A perusal of charter of duties of civilian Messenger of AMC (Annexure P-17), which has been highlighted by Mr. Balram Sharma, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, would go on to show that it had to be maintained for various 3 conditions of office security procedure and instructions for the time of duty of the messenger for eight hours per day on all working days and to be in uniform while on duty and also carry out any other duties assigned by the superior officer. 6. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that the learned Tribunal as such was correct in dismissing the Original Application, whereby the allegations were made regarding applicant(s) refusal to carry out the duties upto 8 hours per day which were without any basis. The Show Cause Notices having been issued and the absence having been proved, the deduction has been made from her salary when she was not present. 7. In such cirmcustances, we do not find, it a fit case to exercise our extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. Resultantly, the present writ petition stands dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, are accordingly disposed off. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 11th September, 2025 (munish thakur)