IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3695 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Durgesh Nandini …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Hemant Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main relief:- “ That the respondents may kindly be directed to grant the work charge status/regularization to petitioner immediately on completion of 8 years of daily wage service w.e.f.01.01.2008 alongwith all consequential benefits including pay fixation, pay arrears, increments, seniority and other benefits etc.” 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Before the reply could be received on behalf of the respondents, learned counsel representing the petitioner, while referring to judgment dated 06.02.2025 passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, titled The State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Surajmani and another alongwith connected matters, states that issue sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated and as such, petitioner would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that since representation filed by the petitioner in the case at hand already stands rejected by way of passing speaking order, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner to consider her case in light of judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Surajmani case (supra) is not sustainable. 4. However, having carefully perused the copy of order dated 18.01.2025 (Annexure P-5) placed on record passed on the representation filed by the petitioner, this Court finds that earlier representation filed by the petitioner was rejected on account of pendency of SLP filed by the respondent-State in Surajmani case 3 (supra). Now since SLP filed by the respondent-State in Surajmani case (supra) stands decided vide judgment dated 06.02.2025, wherein it has been held that daily wage employee shall be entitled to work charge status on his/her having completed eight years service, there cannot be any impediment in issuing the direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Surajmani case (supra). 5. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents. Moreover, issue sought to be decided in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Surajmani case (supra) and as such, present petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner afresh taking note of judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Surajmani case (supra) expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks. Order dated 18.01.2025 is quashed and set-aside. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon taking note of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Surajmani case (supra). Liberty is reserved 4 to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if she still remains aggrieved. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 18,2025 (shankar)