Nanak Chand Vs the State of H P and Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

CWP No.6984 of 2023

Decided on: 19^th May, 2025

_________________________________________________________________ Nanak Chand ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents ________________________________________________________________ Coram_

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶6

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

_________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

¶8

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶9

Petitioner seeks retrospective regularization on

¶10

completion of eight years of service w.e.f. 01.01.2007 in regular pay scale applicable to the cadre post with all consequential benefits incidental thereof.

¶11

2 From the joint submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it emerges that:-

¶12

2(i). Petitioner was initially engaged in HPPWD as daily waged Beldar w.e.f. 05.10.998.

¶13

2(ii). According to the respondents, petitioner remained

¶14

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

¶15

2 -

¶16

intermittent daily waged worker during the years 1998 to 2007. He worked continuously for minimum of 240 days in each calendar year w.e.f. 2008 onwards. Accordingly, petitioner’s services were regularized upon his completion of seven years of continuous service vide office order dated 18.08.2015 as per applicable Regularization Policy of the State. Petitioner joined as regular Class-IV employee on 19.08.2015.

¶17

2(iii). According to the respondents, petitioner’s present claim for regularizing his services on completion of eight years w.e.f. 01.01.2007 is barred by delay and laches.

¶18

3. The objection of delay and laches raised by the respondents does not hold good in the given facts and the documents on record. It is not in dispute that in relation to an industrial dispute raised by the petitioner, Reference No.380 of 2012, was registered on 29.11.2012 in the learned

¶19

Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, Kangra at Dharamshala, to adjudicate the following reference:-

¶20

"Whether termination of the services of Sh. Nanak Chand S/C Sh. Hari Singh, Village Passal, Post Office Chauntra, Tehsil Joginder Nagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. from time to time as beldar during 5-10-1998 to 31-8-2007 by the Executive Engineer

¶21

3 -

¶22

HPPWD Division Joginder Nagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. without complying the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, what amount of back wages, seniority, past service benefits and compensation the above Ex-Worker is entitled to from the above employer?"

¶23

Vide award dated 14.01.2022, learned Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, Kangra at Dharamshala, allowed the claim petition preferred by the petitioner. It was held that the breaks given by the respondents to the petitioner from 05.10.1998 to 31.08.2007 were artificial/fictional in nature and consequentially illegal and unjustified. This break period was ordered to be counted for the purpose of continuous service except back wages. Petitioner was further held to be in continuous uninterrupted service with the respondents from 05.10.1998 to 31.08.2007. His seniority was directed to be reckoned from the date of his engagement i.e. 05.10.1998. The operative directions of the award are as under: -

¶24

“18. As a sequel to the findings of this Court on the issues above, the claim petition succeeds and is allowed in part. It is held that the breaks given by respondent to the petitioner from 5.10.1998 to 31.3.2007 were artificial/fictional in nature and consequently illegal and unjustified. This break period is ordered to be

¶25

4 -

¶26

counted for the purpose of continuous service except back wages. Petitioner is held to be in continuous uninterrupted service with the respondent from 5.10.1998 to 31.8.2007. His seniority shall be reckoned from the date of his engagement i.e. 5.10.1998. The parties are left to bear their costs. The reference is answered in above terms. A copy of this Award be sent to the appropriate Government for publication in the official gazette. File after due completion be consigned to the Record Room.”

¶27

The contention of delay and laches urged for respondents does not carry any substance in view of the award passed by learned Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal in petitioner’s favour on 14.01.2022.

¶28

4. It has not been disputed by the respondents that award dated 14.01.2022 has become final. That being the position, petitioner is justified in raising the grievance that he is entitled to count the entire period w.e.f. 05.10.1998 to 31.08.2007 towards his continuous service and that his seniority is to be reckoned from the date of engagement i.e. 05.10.1998.

¶29

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services keeping in view the award passed by the learned Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal,

¶30