IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No: 456 of 1997 Date of decision: 3.3.2008 Manjit Singh Petitioner Versus H.P.State Forest Corporation and another Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 NO For the petitioner: Mr. O.P.Thakur, Advocate For the respondents: Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate Per Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order of the learned H.P.State Administrative Tribunal, dated September 1, 1997 whereby the Original Application filed by the present petitioner was rejected. The petitioner claims that he was engaged on muster roll basis w.e.f. 1st August, 1985. According to the petitioner through he was shown to be on the muster roll of Watch and Ward staff, he was actually performing the duty of Clerk-cum-typist. Before the learned Tribunal, 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2 he had claimed that he should be regularized as Clerk- cum-typist. The learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that merely because the petitioner had been working as Clerk-cum-typist, did not give him any legitimate right to be considered to be appointed as such. The case of the petitioner for regularization against any other post was not considered by the learned Tribunal. The stand of the respondents in the affidavit dated 17th December, 1999, which was filed in response to the order of this court dated 22nd November, 1999, is that the petitioner was initially engaged as Chowkidar on daily waged basis w.e.f. 1.8.1985 to 31.10.1988. It is further the stand of the respondent Corporation that from 1.11.1988 the petitioner worked as helper and continued to work as such till 31.12.1997 and was regularized w.e.f. 1.1.1998 as Chowkidar on regular basis. Before us Mr. O.P.Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, limited his prayer to the effect that the petitioner may be regularized as helper on completion of 10 years w.e.f. 1.8.1995. This court in CWP No. 778 of 2006, State of H.P. Vs. Gauri Dutt has held that the service in the lower post and the higher post cannot be 3 combined to count 10 years service. This Court held as follows:- “After considering all the pros and cons and keeping in view the fact that various anomalous situations may arise we are of the considered view that when an employee completes 10 years of continuous service combined in two scales, an option should be given to the employee to either accept work charge status in the lower scale or he may continue to work on daily rated basis in the higher scale and claim work charge status in the higher scale on completion of 10 years of continuous service in the said scale.” Even if we accept the affidavit of the respondent-Corporation, it is apparent that in case the petitioner opts to be regularized as a helper and his services as such are considered from 1.11.1988, he shall be liable to be regularized as helper w.e.f. 1.11.1998. Mr. O.P.Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that he has instructions from his client to state that his client will opt to be regularized as helper even if services are as such counted from 1988. Keeping in view the law laid down by this court in CWP No. 778 of 2006 State of H.P. Vs. Gauri Dutt and the option exercised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we direct that the respondent-Corporation shall regularize the petitioner as a helper w.e.f. 1.11.1998 with all consequential benefits. 4 Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that vide order dated 5th October, 2005 the respondent- Corporation has re-designated all helpers as Clerks. Needless to say that if that be so, the respondent Corporation shall treat the petitioner like all his colleagues and pass appropriate orders in this behalf. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. March 3, 2008(K) ( Rajiv Sharma ), J.