Krishan Chand vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge

Petitioner was engaged as daily rated casual labourer on 10th October, 1993 in Chowari Forest Range of Dalhousie Forest Division in District Chamba. He was retrenched in the month of February, 2004. The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that the respondents may be directed to reinstate him and thereafter regularise him. It is evident from the mandays chart placed on record that the petitioner has not completed 240 days even for one year before 31st December, 1993. He has only completed 240 days in 1997, 1998 and 1999. In 2003 he has not worked at all and in 2004 he has worked for 24 days only. Since the petitioner has not completed 240 days in a calendar year preceeding his retrenchment, he was not required to be issued notice u/s 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He was also not entitled for any compensation. The case of the petitioner is also that the persons junior to him have been retained while retrenching him.

The respondents were directed to file a supplementary affidavit whether the persons junior to the petitioner have been retained or not. The supplementary affidavit has been filed by Dr. Suresh Kumar, Conservator of Forests, Chamba Circle, H.P. Forest Department, Chamba. It is denied in the supplementary affidavit that the persons junior to the petitioner were retained while retrenching him. It was necessary for the petitioner to work for at least 8/10 years with 240 days in each calendar year to claim regularisation. The petitioner has worked only intermittently. The petitioner has earlier also approached this Court by way of CWP No. 7098 of 2010. The same was disposed of on 28th October, 2010. Thereafter the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest has passed a detailed and reasoned order on 9th March, 2011 (Annexure P-3). In the order (Annexuer P-3), year-wise detail of the mandays chart in respect of the petitioner has been given. There is no irregularity or illegality in order dated 9th March, 2011. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussion made hereinabove, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs.