Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16528 (HP)

Dharam Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2026-04-02

Ajay Mohan Goel

body2026
JUDGMENT : AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J. 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “a) That respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 16.07.2023 on completion of four years as daily wager alongwith all consequential benefits including arrear of salary alongwith interest @ 6% from the date it became due till its realization in the interest of justice. b) That all other consequential benefits including seniority may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a daily wage Cook on 16.07.2019 with respondent No.3. According to the petitioner, upon completion of 4 years of continuous service as a daily wage Cook, he became entitled for regularization in terms of the Policy of the State Government. The petitioner made a representation in this regard on 18.09.2023, which was duly forwarded by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2. However, as no action was taken thereupon, hence the petition. 3. The stand of respondent No.3 is that as it is merely a project implementing agency which has been created by way of notification for execution/implementation of various projects and schemes launched by the Centre or the State Government, thereafter the Board does not has any independent source of income of its own. It is further the stand of respondent No.3 that the petitioner was appointed as a daily wage Cook in the Old Age Home at Basantpur vide order dated 16.07.2019 as per sanction letter of the State Government dated 07.04.2017. The entire funds including funds for the salary of the petitioner as well as other similarly situated persons were being provided by the State Government itself. It is also mentioned in the reply of the said respondent that vide notification dated 05.01.2024, State Government took a decision to close the respondent-Board with immediate effect. It was also decided that liability which may arise in future after the closure of the Board shall be borne by the Department of Women and Child Development and Empowerment of SCs; OBCs; Minorities & the Specially-Abled, Himachal Pradesh. It was also decided that liability which may arise in future after the closure of the Board shall be borne by the Department of Women and Child Development and Empowerment of SCs; OBCs; Minorities & the Specially-Abled, Himachal Pradesh. With regard to the request of the petitioner for regularization, the stand of the said respondent is that it has already taken up the matter with the Directorate i.e., respondent No.2 and reference in this regard has been made to Annexures R-3/3 and R-3/4 appended with the reply. 4. The stand of respondents No.1 and 2 in their reply is that the petitioner is an employee of respondent No.3, which is an independent organization and respondent No.3 was running an Old Age Home at Basantpur in District Shimla, for which the State Government was providing grant-in-aid to run the aforesaid Home, as per the norms of the departmental Scheme/policy. It is further the stand of the said respondents that the petitioner sought regularization of his services against the post of daily wage Cook in Old Age Home, Basantpur, in terms of the Government Policy dated 30.04.2023, but, as the petitioner is not a Government employee and is not holding any civil post, therefore, he cannot claim any such relief from the respondents in terms of the said notification. It is also the stand of the said respondents that the petitioner is an employee of respondent No.3 which is an independent organization, hence, his grievances are to be redressed by the respondent Council. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith. 6. Some facts which are relevant to be narrated at this stage itself, which are borne out from the documents appended with the respective replies by the respondents are that the petitioner was appointed against the post of a daily wage Cook on the basis of a requisition placed to the employment exchange by respondent No.3 after receiving approval from respondent No.2, to fill up the said posts. This is evident from Annexure R-3/3, in terms whereof, the post of Cook, against which the petitioner was appointed, was filled up on the basis of an interview after sponsoring of the name of the petitioner by the employment exchange. This is evident from Annexure R-3/3, in terms whereof, the post of Cook, against which the petitioner was appointed, was filled up on the basis of an interview after sponsoring of the name of the petitioner by the employment exchange. Thus, one fact which is apparent is that the appointment of the petitioner was not a backdoor entry, but, the same was as a result of his name being sponsored by the employment exchange followed by interview. 7. Annexure R-3/2 appended with the reply filed by respondent No.3, which is a communication dated 05.01.2024 demonstrates that in terms of this notification, The Governor, Himachal Pradesh, was pleased to order the closure of respondent No.3-Board with immediate effect. The closure was ordered subject to the following terms and conditions:- “The Governor, Himachal Pradesh is pleased to order the closure of the H.P. State Social Welfare Board with immediate effect as per following term and conditions:- 1. The Old Age Home Basantpur, will be entrusted to the Directorate of ESOMSA alongwith all assets and liabilities. 2. The Balwadi Teachers and other employees who are deployed temporarily in different Offices under the Directorate of WCD and ESOMSA will continue at their present places of Deputation. 3. The employees presently posted in the O/o State Social Welfare Board will be deployed under the Directorate of Women and Child Development and ESOMSA alongwith entire records against created/vacant posts available in the Departments and their services will continue to be regulated as per terms and conditions of their appointment under State Social Welfare Board. 4. The Secretary State Social Welfare Board will issue the notice to the land lord as per the terms and conditions of the agreement for vacating the office accommodation and initiate necessary action for shifting of the entire record/assets to the Directorate of WCD/ESOMSA. 5. The liabilities which may arise in future after the closure of the Board shall be borne by the departments of WCD/ESOMSA as the case may be. By Order M. Sudha Devi Secretary (SJ & E) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh.” 8. In terms of the notification, the services of the petitioner were deployed with respondent No.2 and he continues to serve respondent No.2. Thus, as of now, the petitioner is performing his duties under the aegis of respondent No.2, in terms of the terms and conditions of notification dated 05.01.2024. 9. In terms of the notification, the services of the petitioner were deployed with respondent No.2 and he continues to serve respondent No.2. Thus, as of now, the petitioner is performing his duties under the aegis of respondent No.2, in terms of the terms and conditions of notification dated 05.01.2024. 9. The closure of the H.P. State Social Welfare Board was ordered with immediate effect vide notification dated 05.01.2024, whereas the reply was filed by respondents No.1 and 2 i.e., The State of Himachal Pradesh and the Directorate concerned on 25.10.2024 i.e., after the issuance of notification dated 05.01.2024. After 05.01.2024, as respondent No.3 ceased to exist, the services of the petitioner were deployed with respondent No.2. Obviously, thereafter, the petitioner is not an employee of respondent No.3, yet, in its reply filed by respondents No.1 and 2, after the issuance of notification dated 05.01.2024, they claim the petitioner to be an employee of respondent No.3. 10. Be that as it may, there are on record instructions dated 30.04.2023, issued by the Department of Personnel (AP-III) on the subject “regularization of daily waged workers/contingent paid workers.” 11. In terms of these instructions, the Government had decided that the services of daily waged/contingent paid workers in all departments, who had completed 4 years of continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in a calendar year except where specified otherwise for the tribal areas as on 31.03.2023, were to be regularized against vacant posts in the respective departments and those daily waged/contingent paid workers, who were due to complete 4 years of continuous service as on 30.09.2023, were to be regularized after 30.09.2023, accordingly. 12. In the present case, the petitioner was initially engaged as a Cook on daily wage basis on 16.07.2019. Thus, he completed 4 years of service as on 15.07.2023. In terms of Annexure P-2, the right of regularization stood conferred upon the petitioner as on 30.09.2023. In light of the fact that the petitioner was appointed against the post of daily wage Cook on his name being sponsored by the employment exchange, followed by an interview with respondent No.3, with due approval of the Directorate concerned and as now the petitioner happens to be serving with the Directorate itself after the closure of respondent No.3-Board, he cannot be denied regularization from due date in terms of the stand that has been taken by respondents No.1 and 2. 13. 13. The contention of the State that the petitioner happens to be an employee of respondent No.3, cannot be believed, as respondent No.3 is not in existence and all the employees working with respondent No.3 are now working with respondent No.2. 14. Further the contention of the State that the petitioner cannot claim any relief against respondent No.1 and 2 is also not tenable in the light of the fact that the petitioner now happens to be serving respondent No.2 and even while he was in service of respondent No.3, his wages etc., were coming from respondents No.1 and 2 only. 15. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed. The act of the respondents of denying regularization to the petitioner in terms of Annexure P-2 is held to be bad and respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner from due date in terms of instructions dated 30.04.2023 (Annexure P-2). The regularization of the petitioner shall be with all consequential benefits, including seniority. However, the monetary benefits shall be notional as from due date up to the date of the passing of this judgment. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.