1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 11384 of 2011 with CWP Nos. 11399 of 2011-J, 11406 of 2011-A, 11607 of 2011-A, 11611 of 2011-B, 11616 of 2011-B, 11617 of 2011-B, 11620 of 2011-B and 11634 of 2011-D Decided on: December 27, 2011. ----------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No. 11384 of 2011 1. Surender Singh, s/o Sh. Dhani Ram, r/o Dodra, Tehsil Dodra Kawar, Distt. Shimla (HP). 2. Rehan Lal, s/o Sh. Prem Lal, r/o Jiskoon Teshil Dodra Kawar, Distt. Shimla (HP). 3. Murti Ram, s/o Sh. Bamds Ram, r/o Jakha Tehsil Dodra Kawar, Distt. Shimla, (HP). 4. Member Singh, s/o Sh. Bari Singh, R/o Jiskoon, Tehsil Dodra Kawar,Distt. Shimla (HP). 5. Shiv Saran, s/o Sh. Kharak Singh, r/o Kawar Tehsil Dodra Kawar, Distt. Shimla (HP). Petitioners Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh, Through Secretary (Forest) Government of Himachal Pradesh, H.P. Secretariat, Shimla-171002. 2. Principal C.C.F., Forest Department, Tollend, Shimla-2. 3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Rohroo, Tehsil Rohroo, Distt. Shimla (HP). Respondents 2 2. CWP No. 11399 of 2011 1. Narain Singh, son of Shri Guddu Ram, resident of Village Kass Geyola, Post Office Bhararu, Tehsil Jogindernagar, District Mandi, H.P. 2. Santosh Singh, son of Shri Roshan Lal, resident of Village Solebanehar, Post Office Lambagaon, Tehsil Jasinghpur, District Kangra, H.P. Petitioners Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Principal Secretary (Forests) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171002. 2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. 3. Conservator of Forests, H.P. Wild Life Circle (North) Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. 4. Divisional Forest Officer, Wildlife Division, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P. Respondents 3. CWP No. 11406 of 2011 Bhadur Singh, s/o Late Sh. Gokla Nand, R/o Gumma, Tehsil Chirgaon, Distt. Shimla(HP). Petitioner Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh, Through Secretary (Forest) Government of Himachal Pradesh, H.P. Secretariat, Shimla-171002. 2. Principal C.C.F., Forest Department, Tollend, Shimla-2. 3 3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Rohroo, Tehsil Rohroo, Distt. Shimla (HP). Respondents 4. CWP No. 11607 of 2011 Baldev Singh, son of Sh. Gulaba Ram, resident of Village Manwa, P.O. Manwa, Tehsil and Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. presently working as a Beldar in Horticulture Department at Bilaspur, H.P. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of H.P. through the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 2. The Director Horticulture with Hqr at Shimla, H.P. 3. The Horticulture Development Officer, Bilaspur, H.P. Respondents 5. CWP No. 11611 of 2011 Vidya Parkash, son of Sh. Madhav Dev Sharma, resident of Village and P.O. Nirmand, Tehsil Nirmand, Distt. Kullu, H.P. presently serving as a Lab Assistant in Agriculture Department at Rekong Peol, Distt. Kinour, H.P. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of H.P. through the Principal Secretary (Agriculture) with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 2. The Director of Agriculture with Hqr at Boileauganj, Shimla, H.P. 4 3. The District Agriculture Officer Rekong Peo, Distt. Kinnour, H.P. Respondents 6. CWP No. 11616 of 2011 Kirpa Ram, son of Sh. Piru Ram, resident of Village Rano, P.O. Devthi, Tehsil and Distt. Solan, H.P. Ex. Forest Worker Forest Division Solan, Range Sapatu, Distt. Solan, H.P. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of H.P. through the Principal Secretary (Forests) with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 3. The Conservator of Forest, Forest Circle Nahan, Distt. Sirmour, H.P. 4. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Solan,H.P. Respondents 7. CWP No. 11617 of 2011 1. Panchhi Ram, son of Sh. Lokha Ram, r/o Vill. Nain Gujran, P.O. Rohin, Tehsil Ghumarwin, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. Ex. Forest Worker Forest Div. Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. 2. Niku Ram, son of Sh. Lohaka Ram, r/o Village and P.O. Balh Churan, Tehsil Ghumarwin, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. Ex. Forest Worker Forest Div. Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. Petitioners 5 Versus 1. The State of H.P. through the Principal Secretary (Forests) with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 3. The Division Forest Officer, Forest Division, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. Respondents 8. CWP No. 11620 of 2011 Salochana Devi, wife of Sh. Chaman Lal, resident of Village and P.O. Kollar, Tehsil Paonta, Distt. Sirmour, H.P. presently serving on daily wage basis as a Forest Worker in Forest Division Nahan, Range Kollar, Distt. Rampur, H.P. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of H.P. through the Principal Secretary (Forests) with Headquarter at Shimla, H.P. 2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests with Hqr at Shimla, H.P. 3. The Conservator of Forest, Forest Circle Nahan, Distt. Sirmour, H.P. 4. The Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Nahan, Distt. Sirmour,H.P. Respondents 6 9. CWP No. 11634 of 2011 1. Nand Lal, s/o Sh. Man Singh, r/o Village Chambi, Tehsil Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. presently serving as Chowkidar at Gumma, in Geological wing, Department of Industries, Shimla, H.P. Date of engagement on daily wage basis:-16.8.1982. Date of regularization:-16.8.1982. 2. Narain Singh, S/o Sh. Beser Ram, r/o VPO Gumma, Tehsil Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. presently serving as rigman in Geological wing, Department of Industries at Shimla, H.P. Date of engagement on daily wage basis:-23.10.1982. Date of regularization:-4.7.1995. Petitioners Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary Industries to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2. 2. Director of Industries, Himachal Pradesh, Udyog Bhawan, Shimla-I. Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud,Judge. For petitioners: M/s. Ranjana Parmar,Sanjay Dutt, Abhyendra Gupta, Advocates,for the respective petitioners. For Respondents: Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. 7 Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim the benefit of the decision of the Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P., 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316 and claim work charge status on completion of ten years of daily waged service with 240 days per year. In any case, as rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, there cannot be work charge status prior to 1.1.1994. The claim for regularization will be considered only subject to the availability of vacancies. All these aspects, the petitioners pray, they may be permitted to bring to the notice of the third respondent. It is open to them to do so. In the event of the petitioners filing appropriate representation(s) furnishing their service particulars, the matter will be considered and appropriate action will be taken in accordance with law within four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with the representation(s) by the petitioner concerned before the third respondent. 8 2. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application (s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Dev Darshan Sud), Judge 27th December, 2011 (pankaj)