IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. Nos. 5303, 5308 and 5309 of 2010 Decided on: 7th September, 2010 1. CWP No. 5303 of 2010 Jalam Singh Versus State of H.P. & ors. 2. CWP No. 5308 of 2010 Mangal Singh Versus State of H.P. & ors. 3. CWP No. 5309 of 2010 Roshan Lal Versus State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge For the Petitioners: Mr. Devender Sharma, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K.Verma, Dy. A.G. __________________________________________________________ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petitions have been filed with the following prayers:- CWP No. 5303 of 2010 (i) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents- department to consider the case of the petitioner and grant him work charge status w.e.f. 1.1.1994, for all intents and purposes as per the policy of State Government. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents- department to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization with all consequential service benefits, with effect from the day the petitioner completed ten years of service as daily wager on the post of forest worker i.e. w.e.f. the year 1994.” CWP No.5308 of 2010 (i) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents- department to consider the case of the petitioner and grant him work charge status w.e.f. 1.1.1995, accordingly for all intents and purposes as per the policy of State Government. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents- department to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization with all consequential service benefits, with effect from the day the petitioner completed ten years of service as daily wager on the post of forest worker i.e. w.e.f. the year 1995.” CWP No. 5309 of 2010 (i) Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents- department to consider the case of the petitioner and grant him work charge status w.e.f. 1.10.2005 as per the policy dated 6.5.2000.” (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents- department to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization with all consequential service benefits, with effect from the day the petitioner completed ten years of service as daily wager on the post of Beldar i.e. w.e.f. the year 1994.” 2. According to the petitioners, their case is covered by the decision of Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and others 1994 Supplement (2) S.C.C. 313 and the decision rendered by this court in Gauri Dutt & others Vs. State of H.P. Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366. The petitioners may file individual representations before the first respondent, in which case the matter will be duly examined by the first respondent and appropriate action in the matter, in accordance with law, will be taken. 3. With these observations, all the writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice ( Justice Kuldip Singh ), September 7, 2010(K) Judge