AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Notice. Mr. Abhishek Nagta, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents in both the petitions.
These writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost common substantive reliefs. Relief clause herein is extracted from CWP No. 20676/2025: -
“That Annexure P-2 may be set aside/quashed and the respondents may be ordered to refix the pay of the petitioner as per Annexure P-1 dated 04.09.2025 .”
Petitioners case is that while implementing The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Versus Surajmani & Anr.[ Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025], the respondents conferred work-charge status upon them retrospectively and, accordingly, issued office orders dated 04.09.2025 (Annexure P-1 in CWP No.20676/2025) and 23.08.2025 (Annexure P-1 in CWP No. 21154/2025), fixing their pay by granting notional increments. The fixation of pay was carried out by the respondents on notional basis in view of the directions issued in Surajmani[Civil Appeal No.1595 of 2025, decided alongwith connected civil appeals on 06.02.2025]. Petitioners’ grievance is that vide office order(s) dated 14.10.2025 (in both CWP No. 20676/2025 and CWP No. 21154/2025), the notional annual increments granted to them earlier, were withdrawn. Consequently, petitioners’ pay was refixed under the office order dated 14.10.2025 without granting them the benefit of annual increments even on notional basis.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners stand squarely covered and has already been adjudicated upon in Jayanti Rathore & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.p[CWPOA No. 3103/2020 decided on 19.11.2025] where under following directions were issued: -
“8. In view of above discussion, and for the reasons recorded herein above, the instant petition is disposed of, in following terms:-
(i). Claim of petitioners for work charge status from the date of completion of 8 years of continuous daily wages service [stand already given to petitioners 1 & 2 w.e.f. 01.01.2004 and to petitioners 3 to 6 w.e. . 01.01.2005] is affirmed; being inconsonance with the mandate of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Surajmani (supra);
(ii) State Authorities shall extend the relief of “notional benefits” to the petitioners from the date of grant of work charge status [if not already granted] with annual increments till regularization with ‘notional benefits”, but without any past arrears;
(iii). Claim of the petitioners for past arrears [wholly or in part] upon grant of work charge status is declined in terms of the mandate f the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surajmani (supra) which recognizes “notional benefits”;
(iv). Parties to bear respective costs.
In the aforesaid terms, the instant petition along with pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.”
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners would be satisfied, in case, respondents/competent authority are directed to consider and decide the cases of the petitioners in light of the directions issued in the above judgment, more particularly direction No.(ii), in terms of which, the respondents- State have been directed to extend the notional benefits to the petitioners (therein) from the date of conferment of work charge status with annual increments on notional basis. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to this prayer.
In view of above, these petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the cases of the petitioner(s) for grant of notional annual increment from the date of conferment of work charge status, in accordance with law and as well as taking into consideration the above judgment, within a period of six weeks from today. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner(s). Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.