IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 11910 of 2008. Decided on: 13.5.2011. ___________________________________________________________ Baldev Singh. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. A.G. ___________________________________________________________ Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral). The petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para No. 7 (i) to (iii):- “7 (i). The respondents may be ordered to give the regularization to the applicant w.e.f. 1.1.1998/1.4.1998 (and not from 13.5.2004 (notional basis w.e.f. 5.12.2002) after 18 years of service) on the post of ‘Pump Operator’ with all the benefits incidental thereof, such as arrears of pay and seniority etc.. Alternatively, the similar order which was passed by this Hon’ble Court in O.A. 150/1996 titled as Gurnam Singh v/s State of H.P. & others, may also be passed in the present case. (ii). That the respondents may be directed to regularize the service of the applicant after creating a post of ‘Pump Operator’ with all benefits from due date. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 (iii). That the respondents may be directed to give the work-charge status to the applicant exactly after 10 years of service. 2. In the reply, the respondents have taken the following stand vide para 6(1) on merits:- “6 (1). That the contents of this para are matter of record. In fact he worked as Pump Operator w.e.f. 2/91 and worked as such till his regularization. It is further submitted that service of the applicant has been regularized as per policy applicable to the applicant at the relevant time. It is further submitted that the policy formulated under the order of Hon’ble Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhya was applicable only upto 1.1.1998. Thereafter, the policy of regularization being a executive function of Government to its workmen underwent a change from time to time. It is denied that the applicant was entitled to work charge status w.e.f. 1.4.1998. In fact, there are no posts of Pump Operator of work charged. The post of Pump Operator is only regular post, hence there is no question of considering him for work charged status. However, according to the policy applicable to the applicant in December, 2002, the applicant was not eligible for regularization being unqualified. Never the less the service of the applicant has been regularized by respondent State after seeking the relaxation in the R&P Rules. It is submitted that the applicant was unqualified person and as per law and rules he was not entitled to be considered for regularization but the department has done a favour to him by taking the case of relaxation in his qualification to the competent authority. 3 Therefore, as per rules the unqualified person cannot be considered for appointment/ promotion till relaxation is granted by the competent authority. The applicant being unqualified the Government granted relaxation only after giving 3 months departmental training from Polytechnic Institute and allowed regularization only on its successful completion. Still the Government has again given the applicant favour by granting him notional benefit w.e.f. December 2002 when his junior qualified joined. Moreover, the applicant was offered the post and he accepted the terms and causes of action to file and maintain the present O.A. Therefore, the present O.A. is an abuse of process of law as such the O.A. may kindly be dismissed with exemplary costs.” 3. It is further averred as under vide para 2 of the short reply affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents in terms of order dated 7.4.2011:- “That in compliance to the aforesaid order, it is submitted that the applicant has initially been engaged on daily basis as Beldar w.e.f. 3.12.1986 to 31.7.1988, Chowkidar w.e.f. 1.8.1988 to 5.5.1991 and w.e.f. 6.5.1991 onward onward as Pump Operator under I.P.H. Division, Indora and has completed 240 days only w.e.f. 6.5.1991 as Pump Operator. Therefore, he is entitled to seniority w.e.f. 6.5.1991 as Pump Operator. The petitioner has been regularized lateron vide order dated 31.3.2008 in terms of judgment passed in Gauri Dutt’s case on the completion of 10 years continuous service on higher grade i.e. 4 Class-III category w.e.f. 1.1.2001. The revised man days of the petitioner including the man days chart of Beldar and Chowkidar (Class-IV) i.e. w.e.f. 3.12.1986 and 1.8.1988 to 5.5.1991 respectively is hereby annexed as Annexure RA-I. Therefore, in view of subsequent events he has been regularized as per Gauri Dutt’s case and paid arrear and accepted the same, as such the present petition has become infructuous, therefore, the CWP may be dismissed as having become infructuous.” 4. In view of the above replies, in case the petitioner still has any surviving grievance, he may make a detailed representation supported by documents, if any, along with a copy of this judgment to the respondents/competent authority within three months from today, who shall consider and take final decision in the matter in accordance with law within next three months after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, if so desired. Needless to say that consequential benefits, if any, would follow on the decision on the representation. 5. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending application(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. May 13, 2011. (cr)