SAGAR SINGH(Not Applicable) vs STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) — CWP/3824/2024
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 23rd March 2026.
CNR: HPHC010163702024
Filing Number
CWP/12869/2024
Filing Date
01-May-2024
Registration No
CWP/3824/2024
Registration Date
06-May-2024
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
23-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SAGAR SINGH(Not Applicable)
Adv. Chander Narayan Singh
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)
Adv. ,Susheel Gautam,AG 1123
-
2.The Chief Conservator of Forest,(Not Applicable)
-
3.The Himachal Pradesh Natural Resources Management Society (HPNRMS) Solan(Not Applicable)
-
4.The District Project Officer,(Not Applicable)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF
The Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed Sagar Singh's petition seeking work charge status/regularization and consequential benefits after eight years of daily wage service. The court ruled that Singh's case was similar to Sant Ram's (a precedent case upheld by the Supreme Court), relying on the state's own admission in its reply. The court directed respondents to confer the same benefits granted in Sant Ram's case, regularize Singh's service notionally from the due date, and provide actual benefits retroactively for three years preceding the petition filing, within three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Jun-2024
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander NegiView PDF
-
07-May-2024
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF
-
07-May-2024
Office Objection
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel
-
01-May-2024
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/3824/2024
The Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed Sagar Singh's petition seeking work charge status/regularization and consequential benefits after eight years of daily wage service. The court ruled that Singh's case was similar to Sant Ram's (a precedent case upheld by the Supreme Court), relying on the state's own admission in its reply. The court directed respondents to confer the same benefits granted in Sant Ram's case, regularize Singh's service notionally from the due date, and provide actual benefits retroactively for three years preceding the petition filing, within three months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts