Case: THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH REVENUE SECRETARY Vs. PINJU RAM

2. On 27 February 2004, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh addressed a communication inter alia to all Deputy Commissioners and Heads of Departments among others, stating that the regularisation of part time employees was engaging the attention of the State for some time in the past. The Government decided that part time class-IV employees who completed ten years of continuous service as on 31 December 2003 in all departments, except Education and Ayurveda, will be made daily wagers subject to certain terms and conditions. Para 1 and 3 of the letter contained the following conditions:1. Part-time Class-IV employees who have completed ten years of continuous service as on 31.12.2003 will be made daily wager. Posts vacated by such part-time employees shall stand abolished3. The conversion to daily wager status will be with prospective effectSome part time employees had moved the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal seeking regularisation of their services and other benefitsThe Tribunal by its order dated 27 June 2006 observed that the State Government had framed a policy for providing daily wage employment to part time employees completing ten years of service. Hence, the State Government was directed to provide daily wage employment to those applicants before it who had completed ten years of serviceThe State Government filed a writ petition before the High Court which was dismissed, following which a special leave petition was dismissed by this Court on 21 November 2007Another writ petition 1 was filed by a part time employee, Moti Singh seeking conversion to the status of a daily wage worker with effect from the date of completion of ten years of service on a part time basis. On 21 April 2011, a Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the State Government to consider the representation filed by the employee. The High Court held thus:2...We make it clear that in case the petitioner is granted daily waged status retrospectively, he shall not be entitled toconsequential monetary benefit in that regard. The period will be counted only for the purpose of his claim for regularisation after having worked as a daily wager for 10 years in that mannerPursuant to the above directions of the High Court, the State Government in the Department of Revenue issued instructions on 22 September 2011. The instructions, inter alia, govern Revenue Chowkidars and provided as follows:1. That the amount of wages to daily waged Revenue Chowkidars shall be paid from the date they have actually been appointed and working as full time daily wager in the department2. Since the Revenue Chowkidars have worked as part-time prior to their conversion into daily wagers, therefore, they are not entitled to any financial benefit like arrear etc. Attention is also invited to Honble High Court judgment 21.04.2011 passed in a CWP No. 2192 of 2011 titled Moti Singh vs. State and Ors. Where direction has been issued that in case the petitioner is granted daily waged status retrospectively, he shall not be entitled to any consequential monetary benefit3. Seniority to these daily waged Revenue Chowkidars may be granted from the date of completion of 10 years as Part Time workersThe first respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking a grant of daily wage status with consequential benefits with effect from 27 February 2004 2On 7 July 2012, the State Government issued further instructions for the conferment of daily wage status on the remaining part time employees though without financial benefits in the interregnum including the arrears of pay. By its judgment dated 20 July 2012 which is impugned in these proceedings, the High Court issued a direction to the State Government to the effect that all part time Revenue Chowkidars who have been conferred daily wage status in terms of the policy dated 27 February 2004 should be granted monetary benefits with effect from 1 January 2007The High Court directed that having been conferred with daily wage status, they shall be treated at par with all daily wagers in terms of the policy prevailing on the completion of eight years. Consequential benefits were directed to be disbursed within three months failing which interest at the rate of nine per cent will ensue. When the special leave petition came up for hearing on 2 January 2013, a statement was made before this Court on behalf of the Government of Himachal Pradesh that the appellant would confine the challenge only to the question of back wages to persons who are converted to daily wage status. While issuing notice, this Court stayed the grant of consequential benefits.

Court's reasoning:
Having regard to this background, we are of the view, that once the State Government decided to bring part time revenue chowkidars on a daily wage basis with the added stipulation that while their seniority would count from the completion of ten years, this would be without any past financial benefits, this principle was required to be duly followedIn the circumstances, the High Court ought not to have issued a direction for the payment of consequential monetary benefits with effect from 1 January 2007Such a direction in fact was inconsistent with the observations of the High Court itself in Moti Singh (supra) which was decided on 21 April 2011.The direction contained in the impugned order for the payment of monetary benefits with effect from 1 January 2007 shall stand set aside. We clarify that the State Government shall abide by the stipulations which are contained in the communication dated 22 September 2011 (Annexure P-5) issued by the Principal Secretary, Revenue in the Department of Revenue fFor the above reasons, we are of the view that the which have been noted in the earlier part of this judgmentWe, however, clarify that the seniority of the part time chowkidars who are granted daily wage status will be counted from the date of completion of ten years as part time chowkidars though without any financial benefits for the pastSince the High Court has not dealt with the individual facts pertaining to the case of the respondents, we consider it appropriate and proper to allow this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 13 October 2014. Accordingly, we restore the Writ Petition (CWP 7040 of 2014] to the file of the High Court for disposal afresh. The State shall file its counter affidavit before the High Court within a period of four weeks from today so as to enable the High Court to take a considered view in the matter.