Discontinuation Of Establishment's Work Charge Status Does Not Disentitle Workmen From Attaining Work Charge Status: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Work charge status typically refers to a classification or designation given to employees, often in government or public sector organizations, who are hired on a daily wage basis to perform specific tasks or duties with greater benefits and security.

Brief Facts:

The Petitioner (“Workman”) was employed as a 'Beldar' (Groundman) by Management in 1982­83. Subsequently, his services were unlawfully terminated by the Management in 1987. Aggrieved by the termination, the Workman invoked the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, of 1947, leading to a referral to the Labour Court. The Labour Court ruled in favour of Workman and directed reinstatement of the Workman and others with continuity and seniority from the receipt of the reference. Subsequently, the Workman was reinstated, and his services were regularized as a Beldar from 26.11.2008.

In 2010, the Workman approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court (“High Court”), seeking work charge status after completing eight years of service. The High Court directed the Management to consider the matter in light of previous judgments of the Supreme Court. As no action followed, the Workman again filed an original application before the Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal's order instructed authorities to decide the Workman's case based on a relevant High Court judgment. However, an Office Order issued by the competent authority rejected the Workman's case. The decision was based on the fact that the Workman was already granted seniority by the Labour Court. Therefore, he was not entitled to be granted parity in the Class-IV category as work charge status was abolished and converted into regular establishment by the Government.

Feeling aggrieved, the Workman filed a writ petition before the High Court. The Workman argued that denying work charge status after eight years of service from 16.04.1998 was arbitrary and unlawful.

Observations by the High Court:

The High Court referred to the Supreme Court in State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. vs. Sh. Ashwani Kumar [CWP No. 3111 of 2016] and held that 'work charge establishment' status is not a prerequisite for conferring 'work charge' status. It highlighted that regularization is distinct from the conferment of work charge status, and government schemes impose an obligation on departments to consider daily wage workers for such status after completing the requisite years of service.

The High Court held that there is an obligation of departments to confer work charge status in accordance with policy upon completion of service. Therefore, it held that the Workman's claim for work charge status post-completion of eight years of service from 16.04.1998 could not be denied. It emphasized that the cessation of the establishment's work charge status does not negate the employee's right to conferment of work charge status upon completing the requisite service period. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition, directing the Management to confer work charge status on the Workman, with notional monetary benefits up to three years before the petition's filing and actual monetary benefits thereafter.

Case Title: Sh. Ramiya vs State of Himachal Pradesh & others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 17

Case Number: CWP No. 7647 of 2022

Advocate for the Workman: Nishant Khidtta

Advocate for the Management: Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Rupinder SinghThakur, Additional Advocate General.

Click Here To Read/Download Order