IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 11275 of 2008 Decided on: 9.5.2011 Sudarshan Singh ....Petitioner. Versus H.P. State Forest Corporation & another ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner. : Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) It is not in dispute that as far as the conferment of work charge status is concerned, this question has been duly considered and decided by a Division Bench of this Court in a judgment rendered in case CWP No. 5907 of 2010, titled Sukh Chain versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others alongwith other connected matters, decided on 4th May, 2011. 2. However, as far as the question of regularization is concerned, it is always open to the petitioner to make a representation before the Managing Director of the respondent­ Corporation for the redressal of his grievance. In case it is made, it shall be decided by the Managing Director of the respondent­ Corporation, in accordance with law. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?. No 3. With these observations, the present petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. May 9, 2011. (Rajiv Sharma) (hl) Judge