Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 281 (HP)

Kanchhi v. The State of H. P.

2015-04-02

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2015
JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The petitioners are nepalese and have claimed the following substantive relief:- “That respondents may be ordered to regularize the services of the petitioners, from the due dates, or at least work charge status, in view of the order passed in Gehar Singh’s case, may be ordered to be given to the petitioners from the due dates, with all the benefits incidental thereof”. 2. Indisputably the only ground taken by the respondents to resist the claim of the petitioners is that the matter is subjudice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein the larger issue as to whether the petitioners who are not Indian Citizens are entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction of the Courts in India is pending adjudication. 3. Concededly, the petitions pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court have now been dismissed. Therefore, there is no reason why the petitioners ought to be deprived of the benefit of the relief as claimed in the petition particularly when other similarly situated nepalese employees have already been conferred the same and similar benefit. 4. Accordingly the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to confer work charge status upon the petitioners immediately on completion of 8 years of uninterrupted service and thereafter regularize the services of the petitioners in accordance with law upon availability of vacancies. 5 Accordingly, the petition is disposed of so also the pending application (s) if any.