Petitioner, a bulldozer operator, sought regularization despite delay from 1991. Court directed Department to consider his case for regularization with benefits within two months.
Direction to respondents to consider petitioner's case for regularization as Bulldozer-operator with consequential benefits within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CWP(T) No. 8765 of 2008. Decided on 13th December, 2010.
Jai Singh.
….Petitioner.
-Versus-
State of Himachal Pradesh and Others.
…Respondents.
Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No.
____________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) :
Case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that though he had been working continuously as Bulldozer-operator w.e.f. January, 1973, however, he has been regularized in 2007. As per Annexure R-B, petitioner had worked intermittently w.e.f. 1973 till 1989. However, w.e.f. 1991 onwards, he had completed more than 240 days in each calander year up to 2001. His case has been considered for regularization in 2007 instead of 2001. Since the petitioner has completed ten years continuous service w.e.f. 1991 up to 2001 with more than 240 days in each calander year, his case ought to have been considered for regularization as Bulldozer-operator immediately after completion of ten years service.
1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No.
[
(Rajiv Sharma) Judge
December 13, 2010. (bhupender)
`
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's case for regularization as a Bulldozer-operator should be considered based on continuous service exceeding 10 years.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to consequential benefits for regularized service.
Whether the Department should consider the regularization case within a specified time limit.
Jai Singh
State of Himachal Pradesh
Rajiv Sharma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
