Allowed

soma devi v. State of Hp

Himachal Pradesh HC2 May 2014CWP/2808/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this executed writ petition, a part-time sweeperess challenged the State of Himachal Pradesh's order granting her daily wager status after ten years of continuous service as a part-time employee. The court held that daily wager status should have been conferred immediately upon completing ten years of continuous service, allowing her to seek regularization after eight years of daily wager servi

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was allowed; the respondent-State is directed to give daily wager status from the date of completing ten years of continuous service as part-time sweeperess and consider the petition

soma devi Vs State of Hp — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.

¶2

CWP No. 2808 of 2014 Decided on: 2.5.2014

¶3

Soma Devi …Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents

¶6

Coram:

¶7

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.

¶8

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶9

For the petitioner: Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate.

¶10

For the respondent: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with M/s. M.A. Khan, V.S. Chauhan and Romesh Verma, Addl. Advocates General.

¶11

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶12

Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶13

Petitioner was appointed as part-time Sweeperess on 1.7.1997. The respondent-State issued letter dated 27.2.2004 whereby decision was taken that the part-time ClassIV employees, who had completed ten years of continuous service as on 31.12.2003 in all Departments, except Education and Ayurveda Departments, would be made daily wagers subject to the terms and conditions imposed therein. Thereafter, the respondent-State issued another letter dated 13.10.2009, according to which, the respondent-State decided that part-time Class-IV employees having completed ten years continuous service as on 31.3.2009 in all Departments except Education and Ayurveda Departments would be made daily wagers subject to the terms and conditions imposed therein.

¶14

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶15

Petitioner completed ten years of continuous service as part-time Sweeperess in the year 2007. However, she was given daily wager status vide office order dated 17.7.2010. She was required to be given daily wager status immediately after completion of ten years of continuous service as part-time Sweeperess. The respondent-State has also taken a decision that the incumbents, who have worked for ten years on parttime basis would be given daily wager status, thereafter, their services would be regularized after eight years of continuous service as daily wagers. In these circumstances, the date of conferment of daily wager status on an incumbent has to be immediately after completion of ten years of continuous service on part-time basis to enable him/her to complete eight years further service on daily wage basis for seeking regularization.

¶16

Accordingly, in view of the observations and analysis made hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent-State is directed to give daily wager status to the petitioner from the date she completed ten years of continuous service as part-time Sweeperess instead of 17.7.2010 and consider her for regularization from the date she completes eight years of continuous service as daily wager Sweeperess, within a period of eight weeks. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶17

(Rajiv Sharma) Judge

¶18

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge

¶19

2^nd May, 2014 (pankaj)

soma devi v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

soma devi v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priyanka Vs State of Hp

Om Dutt Vs State of Hp

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Hp

Netar Singh Vs State of Hp

Ved Prakash Vs State of Hp

Radha Devi Vs State of Hp