2026:HHC:12756 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10668 of 2023 Decided on: 21.04.2026 Ramesh Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following relief:- “(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may to Rokindly be issued, thereby directing the respondents to regularized the service of the petitioner after the completion of 8 years of continuous daily Wage service w.e.f. 31-1-2002 i.e. 1-2-2010 strictly, as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court passed in Ex. Pet. No. 126/2019 titled as Dila Ram Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others in CWP No. 10426/2012 as well as keeping in view the policy Dated 7-5-2010 of the State i.e. (Annexure- P/10), alongwith all consequential/ financial benefits arising therefrom, including arrears etc. with interest 12% per annum, in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. When the case was listed on 14.06.2026, the following order was passed:- 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:12756 “Heard for some time. Prima facie, this Court is of the considered view that this case is hit by delay and laches as the petitioner did not approach the erstwhile learned Tribunal within the statutory period as from the date when his services were regularized. There is delay of more than eight years in approaching the Court as from the date when the cause of action accrued. To enable learned Counsel for the petitioner to address the Court on this aspect of the matter, list on 21.04.2026.” 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner could not put-forth any substantive contention so as to convince the Court that the petitioner is justified in approaching the Court belatedly with regard to the reliefs prayed. In other words, delay of more than eight years in approaching the Court as from the date when the cause of action accrued could not be satisfactorily explained. 4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed on the ground of delays and latches. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge April 21, 2026 (Rishi)