Disposed¶26

Satin Kumar v. Hrtc and Others

Service law – regularization

Himachal Pradesh HC5 Jul 2024CWP/4152/2024

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP No.4152/2024, Himachal Pradesh High Court (Shimla), decided 05.07.2024 by Bipin Chander Negi, J. Keywords: regularization; contract basis appointment; Driver; Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC); one-year contractual service; consequential benefits; interest 6% per annum; Vikram Singh CWPOA No.2343/2020; Sat Parkash for petitioner; Raman Jamalta for respondents; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; petitioner entitled to regularization from the date of completion of one-year contractual service after initial appointment, with all consequential benefits from the due date; benefits payable on or before 31.12.2024, failing which interest @ 6% per annum; pending application(s), if any, also disposed of. ¶26

Satin Kumar Vs Hrtc and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regularization from his initial date of appointment (w.e.f. 23.08.2004) with consequential benefits and interest, or in the alternative, regularization immediately after one year (i.e. in 2005) by modifying the regularization order dated 31.02.2015.

¶14

Court's answer

The petitioner is held entitled to regularization from the date of completion of one-year contractual service after initial appointment, with all consequential benefits from the due date, his case being squarely covered by Vikram Singh's case.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

Consequential benefits shall be paid to the petitioner on or before 31.12.2024, failing which the respondent-Corporation shall be liable to pay interest thereon @ 6% per annum.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service law — regularization — contract employee. Petitioner, a Driver appointed on contract basis in 2004 and regularized in 2015, sought regularization from his initial date of appointment (23.08.2004) or, alternatively, immediately after one year of contractual service, relying on Vikram Singh vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation, CWPOA No.2343 of 2020 (decided 09.11.2023). Counsel for the respondent-Corporation fairly conceded that the petitioner's case was squarely covered by that judgment. Held: petitioner entitled to regularization from the date of completion of one-year contractual service after initial appointment, with all consequential benefits from the due date. Consequential benefits to be paid on or before 31.12.2024, failing which interest @ 6% per annum becomes payable. Petition disposed of (Bipin Chander Negi, J.).

¶1

( 2024:HHC:4640 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No.4152/2024.

¶4

Date of Decision: 05^th July, 2024.

¶5

Satin Kumar .....Petitioner. Versus HRTC & Ors. …..Respondents.

¶6

Coram

¶7

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge.

¶8

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶9

For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Parkash, Advocate.

¶10

For the Respondents: Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate.

¶11

Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral).

¶12

Petitioner No.1 in the present case was appointed as a Driver in the year, 2004 on contract basis. The service of the petitioner was regularized in the year, 2015.

¶13

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following substantive reliefs:-

¶14

i. That the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner from his initial date of appointments i.e. w.e.f. 23.08.2004, with all consequential benefits, along with upto date interest.

¶15

ii. That or in alternative, the respondent corporation may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner immediately after one year i.e. in 2005, by modifying regularization order dated 31.02.2015 with all consequential benefits.

¶16

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment dated 09.11.2023, passed in

¶17

CWPOA No.2343 of 2020, titled Vikram Singh vs.

¶18

¶19

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶20

¶21

Himachal Road Transport Corporation , along with connected matters.

¶22

4. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment referred supra.

¶23

5. Learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation fairly submits that the case of the present petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment relied upon by the present petitioner in Vikram Singh’s case (supra).

¶24

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is held entitled to regularization from the date of completion of one-year contractual service after initial appointment, with all consequential benefits from the due date.

¶25

7. The consequential benefits of the same shall be paid to the petitioner, on or before 31.12.2024, failing which the respondent/Corporation shall also be liable to pay interest thereon @ 6% per annum.

¶26

8. In view of the above terms, present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.

¶27

(Bipin Chander Negi) Judge

¶28

05^th July, 2024 (Gaurav Rawat)

Satin Kumar v. Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satin Kumar v. Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Vs Additional Disctrict Magistrate and Others

State Vs Bishan Singh

State Vs Bishan Singh

Nirmal Singh and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

Sunita Vs State of H.P. and Others

Sanjay Kumar Vs Hrtc and Anr.