Narender Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Narender Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's case in accordance with the law laid down in Surajmani and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within six weeks; copy of the order so passed to be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, serving in the respondent H.P. Public Works Department, is entitled to grant of work charge status from the date he completed eight years of service, with all incidental benefits.

Court's answer

Without examining the merits of the matter, the Court disposed of the writ petition with direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with the law laid down in Surajmani (State of H.P. v. Surajmani, Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025).

Ratio / Principle

The competent authority was directed to pass appropriate order in accordance with law within six weeks, and a copy of the order so passed was to be communicated to the petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Narender Kumar v. State of H.P. and others, CWP No.14914 of 2025 (High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla), decided on 16th September, 2025 by Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua. The petitioner, serving in the respondent H.P. Public Works Department, sought a direction for grant of work charge status from the date he completed eight years of service with all incidental benefits. Learned counsel submitted that the issue and relief were covered by the Hon'ble Apex Court's decision in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr. (Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025), in some connected matters where the respondent-Department was itself the appellant, and that the petitioner would be satisfied if the respondents were directed to examine his case in light of that judgment within a fixed time schedule; the learned Additional Advocate General was not averse to this prayer. Having regard to these submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, the Court disposed of the writ petition with direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's case in accordance with the law laid down in Surajmani and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within six weeks, with a copy of the order so passed to be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of in the above terms.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.14914 of 2025

Decided on: 16^th September, 2025

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Narender Kumar …..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and others .....Respondents

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the Petitioner: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

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

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional

Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the

parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

3. Petitioner is serving in the respondent-H.P. Public Works Department and has prayed for direction to

the respondents to grant him work charge status from the

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2

date he completed eight years of service with all incidental benefits.

4. Learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in the writ petition and the relief prayed for by the petitioner are now covered by the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.² . The respondent-Department was also the appellant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in some of the connected matters. Learned vice counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to examine his case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in accordance with law laid down in Surajmani² and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within six weeks from today. Copy of the order so passed, be also communicated to the petitioner.

2 Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025

3

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above

terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if

any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 16, 2025 Judge Mukesh