IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 792 of 2011 Decided on: April 27, 2011. Ram Singh & anr. ….. Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & anr. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG for respondent No. 1. Ms. Nishi Goel, Advocate, vice counsel for respondent No. 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners after completion of 8 years of their continuous service i.e. from the year 2005 with all consequential benefits of pay, arrears, seniority, etc.etc.” 2. The Municipal Corporation has filed reply wherein it is stated that they have taken up the matter before the Government and the matter is now pending before the Government. Paras- 6 and 10 of the reply read as follows:- “6. That in reply this para it is submitted that the replying respondent has taken u[ the matter with the respondent State for reviving the cadre of the sanitary inspector in the resondent Corporation with a view to fill up the vacant posts of the Sanitary Inspectors and the matter is still under consideration before the respondent State as no sanctions has been conveyed in the matter. It is pertinent to mention here that the services of the Sanitary Inspectors are required essentially so as to supervise the sanitation work within the jurisdiction of the respondent Corporation and accordingly the State Government was requested through Director, Urban Development to the Government of H.P. to regularize the services of the petitioner on the analogy of the Junior Engineers who were working in the Corporation on contract basis through their cadre exists with the H.P. Public Works Department. In view of these facts it would not be possible 2 for the answering respondent to take steps to regularize the services of the petitioner especially when there exist no cadre of Sanitary Inspector with the respondent Corporation. 10. That the contents of this para are admitted to the extent that the letter dated 17.7.2010 (Annexure P-5) has been written by the replying respondent. It is submitted here that the matter is still under consideration before the respondent State. Till the time the decision in the matter is not taken by the respondent state the replying respondent can not initiate any steps to regularize the services of the petitioners especially when the cadre of the Sanitary Inspector stands merged with the respondent State.” 3. Despite direction by this Court on 4.3.2011 to file reply as to the action taken on Annexure P-5, there is no reply yet. There is no point in granting any further time since the Government has to take decision in the matter. The writ petition is hence disposed of directing the first respondent to take decision on Annexure P-5 in the light of the reference already made by the second respondent and as referred in the reply, as extracted above. This shall be done within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition, by the petitioner before the first respondent. Depending on the action, thus taken by the Government, the needful will be done by the second respondent within another one month. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 27th April, 2011. (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (vs) Judge.