IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP-T No. 353/2008 Decided on:8.3.2010 _____________________________________________ Het Ram. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. No For the petitioner : Mr. L.N. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General with Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral) Petitioner by way of this petition is seeking directions to respondents for giving him work charge status after completion of requisite number of years as stipulated in the policy. According to petitioner, he was engaged in the year 1987 and has continuously worked up to 2007 and has completed 240 days in each calendar year except in the year 2002, in which year he has only completed 225 days. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? . No 2 Plea of Mr. R.K. Sharma, learned Sr. Addl. Advocate General is that since petitioner has not completed 240 days in the year 2002, he could not be granted the work charge status. Mr. L.N. Sharma has placed on record copy of medical certificate whereby petitioner has been reported sick with effect from 18.3.2002 to 18.7.2002. It is in view of his illness, petitioner could not complete 240 days in the year 2002. Moreover, petitioner has worked continuously for more than 8 years and completed 240 days in each calendar year except in the year 2002. He has completed 225 days in the year 2002. There is shortfall of only 15 days. Respondent-State being a Welfare State should have overlooked shortfall of merely 15 days. The action of respondent- State not to condone shortfall of 15 days rather amounts to unfair labour practice and is contrary to constitutional philosophy. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to grant work charge status to petitioner after condoning 15 days shortfall in the year 2002 with all the consequential benefits like seniority etc. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 8.3.2010 *awasthi*