IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 11855 of 2008. Decided on: 7.1.2011. ___________________________________________________________ Ram Tilak. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes. For the petitioner : Mr. V.B. Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy.A.G. ___________________________________________________________ Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral). The petitioner had joined the employment of the respondents, particularly respondent No.4 as Beldar on 25.4.1985. However, his services were terminated on 4.4.1987. Being aggrieved, the termination was challenged by him by way of a reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Labour Court which answered the reference vide award dated 1.7.2000, operative parat whereof is as under:- “Keeping in view the aforesaid findings and discussions, I hold that as per Ex.R-1, petitioner took admission in 11th Class on 14.6.1989 and remained in School till 8.11.1990. So, though the petitioner is entitled to re-instatement with seniority & continuity of service for the purpose of regularization, but he is not entitled to back wages. The reference is answered in affirmative. Let a copy of this award be sent to the appropriate Government for its publication in accordance with law.” 2. The above award of the Labour Court was challenged by the employer before this Court in CWP No. 656 of 2000, but without success. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 3. In view of the above, it is manifest that the Labour Court had ordered re-instatement of the petitioner with seniority and continuity of service for the purpose of regularization. At this juncture, it shall be pertinent to notice that though services of the petitioner have since been regularised as Beldar w.e.f. 7.12.2006, yet his grievance is that his junior Shri Dharam Dass has been regularised w.e.f. June, 2000. 4. With regard to regularization of the said Shri Dharam Dass, the following averments have been set up on behalf of the respondents vide para 6 (v) of the reply:- “6 (v). In reply to this para it is submitted that the applicant joined back with the respondent-department on 17.10.2003 consequent upon the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of H.P. in CWP No. 656 of 2000 dated 16./9.2003 and Sh. Dharam Dass daily paid was rightly regularised as Class-IV during the year June, 2000 being eligible as per the policy in vogue. During the regularization of sh. Dharam Dass the case of the applicant for re-engagement was pending before the Hon’ble High Court for adjudication due to which he was not regularised. However, after receiving the court order in the said case the permission for regularization of the applicant has been submitted to the Government for necessary approval/sanction and will be regularised soon after receiving the same.” 5. Now, since the case of the petitioner has been finally decided by this Court up-holding the award of the Labour Court, he is entitled for regularization from a back date over and above his junior, Shri Dharam Dass. 6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed with a direction to respondent No.1/competent authority to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization as Beldar w.e.f. June, 2000 when his junior the aforesaid Shri Dharam Dass was regularised as Beldar, instead of December 7, 2006, when the petitioner was 3 actually regularised as Beldar, along with consequential benefits within three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner, failing which interest at the rate of 9% shall also be payable. 7. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. January 7, 2011. (cr)