2026:HHC:28343 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWPOA No.4093 of 2019 Decided on: 10th July, 2026 _______________________________________________________ Noratru Devi ...Petitioner Versus H.P. State Forest Corporation & Anr. ...Respondents ________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Prantap Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. D.S. Kainthla, Advocate. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) By way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:- “(i) That the services of the petitioner may be regularized from 01.03.2005. (ii) That the petitioner on regularization may be posted in Pangi Tehsil at the same place where she is presently working. (iii) That all the consequential benefits accruing from the regularization of the petitioner on 01.03.2005 be paid to the petitioner. (iv) That the arrears which will accrue on account of regularization of the petitioner w.e.f. 01.03.2005 be also paid to the petitioner immediately so that she may be able to spend this amount on the education 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:28343 of her children.” 2. The facts as emerge from the pleadings are that husband of the petitioner late Shri Lekh Ram, was working as a daily wage Chowkidar with the respondent-Corporation since 06.09.1985, who died on 19.04.1996. After his death, the petitioner was offered appointment on compassionate grounds as a daily wage Chowkidar on 04.01.1999, though claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition to be on 01.03.1997. It has been averred in the petition that despite completion of about 15 years of service by the petitioner, taking appointment w.e.f. 01.03.1997 (Annexure P-1), her services were not regularized till the year 2011. An option was sought on 23.07.2011 from the petitioner that on regularization she is willing to serve in Rosin and Turpentine Factory (for short “R&T Factory”), Nahan/Bilaspur against vacancy on un-skilled worker on the terms and conditions as applicable under the Factories Act. However, the petitioner before giving her consent had made a request on 16.07.2011 (Annexure P-2) to post her at Pangi after regularizing her services, since she is resident of Pangi Tribal area which is a difficult area, and it would be difficult for her to serve outside the Pangi as she resides alone at home. 3 2026:HHC:28343 3. It has also been averred in the petition that the petitioner is a resident of Pangi area, which remains cut off from other parts of the State for about half of the year due to snowfall. It is not possible for her to work at such a distant place from her home. It has also been averred that Pangi station is suitable for her because she is a resident of that area, whereas posting in this area is avoided by the employees posted from outside, whereas the petitioner is willing to work in Tehsil Pangi, which is one of the difficult areas of the State. It has also been averred that the offer given to her for regularization and thereafter posting in Nahan/Bilaspur was neither a genuine offer nor a fair and reasonable approach to an employee, who is a woman and working at the lowest ebb of the hierarchical system of the organization. Further, she will not be able to maintain her family and also manage the expenses of education of her children. 4. It has further been averred that the action of the respondent-Corporation in not regularizing the services of the petitioner is illegal and against the principles of natural justice. She is entitled to regularization pursuant to the policy of the Government after eight years of service and thus approached the 4 2026:HHC:28343 Court seeking a direction to the respondent-Corporation to regularize her services w.e.f. 01.03.2005 besides other reliefs. 5. The respondent-Corporation filed reply to the petition and did not dispute the fact regarding regularization offered to the petitioner. It has been averred that 69 posts of unskilled workers in the R&T Factory Nahan/Bilaspur were approved by the Board of Directors of the respondent-Corporation. Thereafter, these posts were to be filled up from amongst the daily wagers Fieldman, who had completed eight years of service as on 31.03.2008 with minimum of 240 days per calendar year. The respondent-Corporation offered the petitioner regularization as an unskilled worker in R&T Factory Nahan/Bilaspur, which was not opted for by her. The option form of the petitioner has also been enclosed. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record letter dated 12.08.2015 (Annexure P-6), wherein it has been mentioned that the services of the petitioner have been regularized as a Peon, who joined her services at Pangi Unit of the respondent-Corporation on 05.08.2015. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record carefully. 5 2026:HHC:28343 8. It is not in dispute that husband of the petitioner, who was working with the respondent-Corporation, had died on 19.04.1996 when the petitioner was about 25 years of age. Though the petitioner has claimed that she was offered appointment in the year 1997, but as per the respondent- Corporation, she had joined her services on 04.01.1999, on compassionate grounds. 9. No doubt, the petitioner was offered regularization in the year 2011, but due to adverse family circumstances, she could not join at R&T Factory Nahan/Bilaspur, which was far off from her native place and very difficult to join being a Class-IV employee. A woman who had lost her husband and was left behind with her children, it was not possible for her to join at R&T Factory, Nahan/Bilaspur. The petitioner had made a representation dated 16.07.2011 (Annexure P-2) to respondent No.2 to post her in Pangi after regularizing her services where she was working as daily wage worker for the last 10 to 11 years, but her prayer to post her in Pangi after regularization does not seem to be accepted, which fact has not been disputed by the respondent-Corporation. Since the petitioner was eligible and could not join at Nahan/Bilaspur due to adverse family 6 2026:HHC:28343 circumstances, she can be denied the salary of the post from the date when other similar situate daily wage workers have been regularized in the year 2011, but she cannot be denied regularization. The Court is passing the directions to regularize services of the petitioner keeping in view the peculiar facts of the present case firstly, considering that she had lost her husband at a very young age; secondly, she could not join at such a far off place from her native place being a woman; thirdly, she being Class-IV employee could not have been posted at Nahan/Bilaspur, which is about more than 300 Kilometres from her home and fourthly, by posting her at Nahan/Bilaspur, virtually the regularization of her services have been denied. 10. 10. The respondent-Corporation cannot even lose sight of the fact that the employees even today are not willing to join their duties at Pangi, which is a tribal and most difficult area as well as snow bound area for about 6 months at the relevant time and cut off from rest of the world and the petitioner is willing to serve in Pangi, where she was already working for the last many years. However, at the same time, to balance equities, the petitioner is held entitled to regularization from the year, 2011 when other persons were regularized, only, but without any 7 2026:HHC:28343 monetary benefits till her actual regularization. No doubt the petitioner has approached the Court well within time, but she did not perform her duties on the post on regular basis and further she was offered the appointment and thus, keeping in view the overall circumstances of the case, the petitioner is held entitled to regularization with all consequential benefits on notional basis from the month of July 2011, when other persons were regularized, till her actual regularization as Peon w.e.f. 05.08.2015 and thereafter, the petitioner is held entitled to all the monetary benefits. 11. The Court is not persuaded to accept the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the petitioner had completed 8 years of service in the year 2005, she ought to have been regularized from the said date, for the reason that the respondent-Corporation has averred that the petitioner was appointed on 04.01.1999 and she had not completed 8 years of service in the year 2005. Not only this, when the respondent- Corporation had taken steps, after the approval by the Board of Directors to regularize the services of the daily wage employees and the petitioner was offered regularization, she did not accept the same and thus the petitioner is only held entitled to be 8 2026:HHC:28343 regularized w.e.f. July 2011 with all consequential benefits on notional basis and an actual basis from the actual date of regularization. 12. Consequently, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Corporation that the petitioner shall be deemed to have regularized as Class-IV employee on the post of Peon from July 2011 along-with all consequential benefits on a notional basis and actual monetary benefits will be given to her from the date of her regularization made vide office order dated 31.07.2015. The respondent-Corporation is directed to pay monetary benefits to the petitioner from the date of actual regularization of her services made on 31.07.2015. The respondent-Corporation is directed to release the consequential benefits in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from today. In case, the arrears are not released in favour of the petitioner within a period of three months from today, the respondent-Corporation shall be liable to pay interest @6% per annum from today till actual payment to her. No order as to costs. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 10th July, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (ankit) Judge