( 2026:HHC:22805 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPOA No.3254 of 2020 Decided on: 17.06.2026 Uploaded on: 17.06.2026 Ram Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Hemant Kumar Verma, Deputy Advocate General. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) The petitioner by way of present petition has sought direction to the respondents to confer work charge status upon him after completion of 8 years service with all consequential benefits, thereby modifying office order dated 27.01.2014 (Annexure A-4). 2. The facts as emerge from the pleadings are that the petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis as Beldar in the year 1990 and had completed 240 days in each calendar year w.e.f. 1993. Since the petitioner had completed 240 days in each calendar year w.e.f. 1993, he was to be conferred work charge status after completion of 8 years of service, in view of the judgment passed by 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? ( 2026:HHC:22805 ) 2 this Court in CWP No.2735 of 2010, titled, Rakesh Kumar vs. State of H.P and others alongwith connected matters, on 28.07.2010. 3. The respondents filed reply to the petition and not disputed the fact of completion of 240 days in each calendar year by the petitioner w.e.f. 1993. 4. The issue with respect to conferment of work charge status is no more res-integra, in view of the authoritative pronouncement by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, titled, The State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Surajmani and another, wherein it has been held that work charge status has to be conferred after completion of 8 years of service. 5. Keeping in view the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surajmani’s case (supra), the respondents are under obligation to confer work charge status upon the petitioner after completion of 8 years of service. 6. Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to extend the benefit of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surajmani’s case (supra) to the petitioner and confer work charge status upon him, immediately after completion of 8 years of service with all ( 2026:HHC:22805 ) 3 consequential benefits. In case the consequential benefits, if any, are not released in favour of the petitioner within three months from today, the respondents shall pay interest on the arrears @6% per annum from today till actual payment. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) 17th June, 2026 Judge (naveen)