IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 16632 of 2008 Date of decision: 01.12.2010 ________________________________________________________________ Surinder Kumar. .....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. .....Respondent. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, J. 1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes. ________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anil Jaswal, Deputy Advocate General. V.K. Sharma, J (Oral). It is averred that the petitioner was initially appointed as Part-time worker (Class-IV) in Civil Dispensary Kangoo, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, on 03.08.1991 against a vacant post. He continued working as such up till 22.01.1996, when his services were orally terminated w.e.f. 23.01.1996. Consequently, he filed the present petition before the erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal during pendency of which he was re-engaged on 24.12.1996. The petition has been filed on the following prayers: “That the termination of services of the applicant as daily waged worker (Class-IV) orally ordered by the respondent No. 3 on 22.1.1996 may very kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondents may very kindly be directed to re-engage the applicant in service with all 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. ...2... consequential benefits. That the entire record pertaining to the case may kindly be ordered to be summoned from the respondents for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Tribunal.” 2. The respondents have taken the following stand vide para 6(i) and (iii) of the reply: “6(i) In relation to this para, it is submitted that the applicant was engaged by the Chairman, Indian- Red-Cross Society. Hamirpur on part-time basis and in consultation with the respondent No. 2, he was posted in Civil Dispensary, Kangoo which is an institution of the Health & Family Welfare Department. This arrangement has been in vogue as a measure of goodwill gesture to the Indian Red-Cross Society which is a non Governmental Organisation engaged in various Welfare activities in the District. This arrangement generally helped in tiding over man- power shortage in the peripheral medical institutions, where at times, full component of staff is not created for various reasons. In such an eventuality, the work has to be carried out by way of manipulating staff from other institutions and at times, the Indian Red Cross Society comes handy who has been helping needy and indigent persons in earning their livelihood. It is in this back-ground that the applicant was engaged on part-time basis at the instance of the above society at Hamirpur. Thus the engagement of the applicant served twin purposes. But the applicant appears to be swayed by a different consideration in that he wants to derive an element of right from the replying respondents not to be dislodged from the job which was practically provided by the respondent no. 4. thus he had been en employee of and paid by the Society. In this way the replying respondents had no administrative jurisdiction over the applicant. The applicant used to be paid by the Red-Cross Society itself and as such she was never on the pay-roll of the replying respondents. (iii) Not admitted. The applicant ceased to be on the job because the sanction from the Chairman, Indian Red Cross Society, Hamirpur to continue his engagement further would not come, and this ...3... very fact was brought to the notice of the applicant. The reasons for such a discontinuance of his engagement are not known to the replying respondents.” 3. In view of the above, it is manifest that the petitioner is working as Part-time worker (Class-IV) on the establishment of respondent No. 4, District Red Cross Society, Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, continuously w.e.f. 03.08.1991 up till date, except that in between he was disengaged from 22.01.1996 to 23.12.1996, which comes to about eleven months. Admittedly, a Part-time worker is vested with the status of a whole time worker after completion of ten years of he/she service and thereafter after putting in further service of eight years is entitled for regularization. In such circumstances, but for the aforesaid break in service of eleven months from 22.01.1996 to 23.12.1996, the petitioner would have acquired the status of a whole time worker on and w.e.f. 03.08.2001. Thereafter, he would have become eligible for regularization w.e.f. 03.08.2009, since when a period of over one year has already elapsed. 4. Though according to the respondents, the petitioner was dis-engaged for want of sanction from respondent No. 4 and this fact was allegedly brought to his notice, but there is no material, whatsoever, in support of these contentions. It being so, it shall not be unsafe to infer that the dis-engagement of the petitioner was perhaps for some other reason than the projected one. 5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider the ...4... case of the petitioner for grant of the status of a whole time worker w.e.f. 03.08.2001 and thereafter regularize his services w.e.f. 03.08.2009 in relaxation of aforesaid break in service from 22.01.1996 to 23.12.1996, alongwith consequential benefits within a period of three months from today, failing which interest @ 9% shall also be payable. 6. The petition stands disposed of, so also the pending CMP(s), if any. (V.K. Sharma) Judge 1st December, 2010 (virender)