Disposed¶23

Gurmail Singh v. Cskhpkv

Himachal Pradesh HC19 Mar 2025CWP/7481/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Work charge status; work-charged status; daily wage Beldar; eight years of daily wage service; 240 days per calendar year; regularization 06.07.2008; Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Palampur; Gurmail Singh; notional benefits; disposal on joint submission in terms of para 10; Surajmani; Sarwan Kumar; Ashwani Kumar; Mool Raj Upadhyaya; CWP No.7481 of 2024; Justice Sandeep Sharma; Himachal Pradesh High Court Shimla; 19.3.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to implement the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Surajmani and Sarwan Kumar in the petitioner's case, by taking all consequential actions within six weeks from today. ¶23

Gurmail Singh Vs Cskhpkv — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in the respondent-University in 1990 and regularized on 06.07.2008, is entitled to conferment of work charge status on completion of eight years of daily wage service.

¶8

Court's answer

In view of the fair stand taken by learned counsel for the parties and the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the instant writ petition is disposed of in light of the Apex Court judgments in Surajmani and Sarwan Kumar.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The respondent is directed to implement the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Surajmani and Sarwan Kumar in the petitioner's case by taking all consequential actions within six weeks from today.

¶23

Key takeaways

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Himachal Pradesh (Sandeep Sharma, J., oral), CWP No.7481 of 2024, decided 19.3.2025 — Gurmail Singh, engaged as Beldar on daily wages in the respondent-University in 1990 (240 days per calendar year from 1994 onwards; services regularized on 06.07.2008), sought conferment of work charge status on completion of eight years of daily wage service, a benefit denied by the University. On the joint submission of counsel for the parties, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of para 10 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Surajmani (Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025) and the connected matter of Sarwan Kumar (Civil Appeal No.1859 of 2025), both decided on 06.02.2025, wherein the Apex Court held that respondents who had approached the Tribunal or the High Court seeking similar relief are entitled to grant of 'work-charged' status from the date of completion of 8 years of service, with relief limited to notional benefits as explained in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Ashwani Kumar (Civil Appeal No(s).5753 of 2019, based on Mool Raj Upadhyaya). The respondent-University was directed to implement the Apex Court's directions in the petitioner's case with all consequential actions within six weeks; pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.7481 of 2024 Date of Decision: 19.3.2025

¶3

_____________________________________________________________________ Sh Gurmail Singh ……...Petitioner Versus Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya …....Respondent

¶4

Coram

¶5

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

¶6

For the Petitioner: Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Proxy Counsel. For the respondent: Mr. Prince Chauhan, Proxy Counsel.

¶7

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

¶8

Petitioner essentially seeks a direction to the respondent-Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya (in short ‘respondent-University’) to confer work charge status upon him on completion of eight years of daily wage service.

¶9

2. According to the petitioner, he was engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in the respondent-University in 1990. He completed 240 days in each calendar year from 1994 onwards. Services of the petitioner were regularized on 06.07.2008 as Beldar. Petitioner’s grievance is that he was entitled to work charge status on completion of eight years of daily wage service, but this benefit has been wrongly denied to him by the respondent.

¶10

¶11

3. Relief qua conferment of work charge status on completion of eight years of service has been claimed on the strength of the decision rendered in Sarwan Kumar

¶12

Versus Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur¹ , as affirmed in Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Versus Sarwan Kumar² , under the lead case State of HP and others Versus Surajmani and Anr.³

¶13

4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner placed on record copy of the decision rendered in The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.⁴ . Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya Versus Sarwan Kumar⁵ was one of the matters connected and decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court alongwith the case of Surajmani⁵ . Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that these writ petitions be disposed of in terms of para 10 of the aforesaid decision, which reads as under:-

¶14

“10. For the cumulative reasons aforestated, we are of the considered view that the dicta laid down by this Court vide order dated 22.07.2019 in Ashwani Kumar's (Supra) case which is based on the judgment of Mool

¶15

1 O.A.(D) No.404 of 2018, decided on 20.03.2019

¶16

2 CWP No.1396 of 2019, decided on 12.01.2023

¶17

3 LPA No.165 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 12.01.2023

¶18

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

¶19

5 Civil Appeal No.1859 of 2025, decided alongwith connected appeals on 06.02.2025

¶20

¶21

Raj Upadhyaya (Supra) holds the field and would also be applicable to the Respondents herein who had approached the Tribunal or the High Court seeking similar relief. As such, the Respondents shall be entitled for grant of 'work-charged' status from the date of completion of 8 years of service. However, we hold that the relief in the present appeals will be limited to notional benefits as explained in paragraph 3 and 4 of Ashwani Kumar's (Supra) case in Civil Appeal No(s).5753 of 2019 and the present appeals stand disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.”

¶22

5. In view of the fair stand taken by learned

¶23

counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the aforesaid judgment, instant writ petition is disposed of in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Surajmani and Sarwan Kumar . Respondent is directed to implement the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court therein in case of the petitioner by taking all consequential actions within six weeks from today. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶24

(manjit)

Gurmail Singh v. Cskhpkv

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurmail Singh v. Cskhpkv

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

Rajinder Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Hp and Others

Manoj Kumar Vs the Hrtc and Another

Kailash Chand and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

Bal Krishan Vs the Hrtc and Another

Jai Lal Rana Vs Rohan Chand Thakur and Anr.

Surinder Kumar and Another Vs the State of Hp and Others