The High Court of Himachal Pradesh has reaffirmed that once contractual or temporary employees are regularized, they are entitled to the benefits of the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 2022, akin to their counterparts, and denial of such benefits is discriminatory. The judgment applies the principle established in Mohit Sharma v. State of H.P., upholds existing precedent, and holds persuasive value for other courts while being binding within the state.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CWP/16179/2025 of HIMANSHU MEHTA Vs CHAUDHARY SARWAN KUMAR HP KRISHI VISHWAVIDYALYA |
| CNR | HPHC010613982025 |
| Date of Registration | 13-10-2025 |
| Decision Date | 15-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma |
| Court | High Court of Himachal Pradesh |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts in Himachal Pradesh. Persuasive elsewhere. |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms Mohit Sharma v. State of H.P. and Others |
| Type of Law | Service Law – Pay Scales and Regularization |
| Questions of Law | Whether contractual employees, on attaining regular status after promulgation of the Revised Pay Rules, 2022, are entitled to benefits thereunder, including higher or revised pay, regardless of their appointment date. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Judgments Relied Upon | Mohit Sharma v. State of H.P. and Others (CWP No.1638 of 2024) |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
The petitioner’s representation seeking higher pay-scale based on Mohit Sharma (supra) was rejected on the ground that he had not completed two years of contractual service by 30.09.2021 and was not a regular appointee as on that date. The petitioner completed two years’ contractual service in 2022 and was regularized in 2023. The rejection order did not account for the correct legal position as per Mohit Sharma (supra). |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and authorities in Himachal Pradesh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts, service tribunals, and quasi-judicial authorities across India |
| Follows | Mohit Sharma v. State of H.P. and Others (CWP No.1638 of 2024) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms that employees who were originally contractual/temporary but later regularized are entitled to Revised Pay Rules, 2022 benefits after gaining regular status, regardless of whether regularization occurred before or after 03.01.2022, subject to fulfilling specified conditions.
- Echoes that any interpretation denying such benefits creates impermissible discrimination within the same cadre and is violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution.
- Clarifies that authorities must examine relevant facts afresh and cannot mechanically reject claims on technical grounds like date of appointment or mode of entering service.
- Extracts key reasoning from Mohit Sharma (supra) to ensure consistent application for similarly placed employees.
- Lawyers should cite this judgment when representing contractual/temporary employees seeking revised pay scales post-regularization.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court scrutinized the impugned rejection order and found it non-compliant with the true import of Mohit Sharma (supra).
- Relied on detailed extracts from Mohit Sharma (supra), which clarified that once an employee becomes regular, the nature of previous employment is immaterial for pay scale benefits under the Revised Pay Rules, 2022.
- Emphasized that the relevant date for conferring benefits is the date when the employee acquires regular status, not the date of the original appointment.
- Rule 7(A) of the Revised Pay Rules, 2022, makes no distinction based on whether the appointment was contractual or regular, thus employees appointed prior to 03.01.2022 and subsequently regularized are covered.
- The court found that the respondents’ interpretation would create discrimination among employees holding the same post, which is unconstitutional under Articles 14 & 16.
- Concluded that the competent authority must reconsider the petitioner’s case strictly in accordance with the principles enunciated in Mohit Sharma (supra).
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- The rejection of benefits was non-compliant with the judgment in Mohit Sharma (supra).
- Claimed eligibility for revised pay scale upon obtaining regular status, as per judicial precedents.
- Asserted that denial based on date of regularization or prior contractual service was discriminatory and contrary to settled law.
Respondent
- Maintained that the petitioner was not similarly situated to the petitioner in Mohit Sharma (supra).
- Contended that the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 2022, applied only to regular appointees as of 30.09.2021.
- Argued that the petitioner had neither completed two years of contractual service by the relevant cut-off date nor was a regular appointee as required under the Rules.
Factual Background
The petitioner was initially engaged on a contractual basis and completed two years of continuous contractual service in 2022. His services were regularized in 2023. The petitioner submitted a representation for grant of higher pay-scale based on the precedent set in Mohit Sharma v. State of H.P., but this was rejected by the respondents on the ground that he was not a regular employee as of 30.09.2021. He approached the High Court challenging this rejection.
Statutory Analysis
The court examined the Himachal Pradesh Revised Pay Rules, 2022, especially Rule 7(A), as amended. It interpreted these provisions to mean that the benefits extend to employees who, regardless of initial appointment mode (contractual, temporary, etc.), are regularized after 03.01.2022, provided they fulfill the eligibility conditions. The court reinforced a non-discriminatory reading aligned with Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The decision reaffirms and applies settled law as laid down in Mohit Sharma v. State of H.P. and Others, ensuring doctrinal consistency for similar cases in the jurisdiction.