IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 11758 of 2008. Date of Decision: 16.3.2011. Dhian Singh & Ors. …Petitioners. Versus. State of HP & Ors … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? No. For the petitioners: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl. AG with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. AG. Deepak Gupta, J.(oral) 1. By means of this petition the petitioners have prayed that they may be given work charged status on completion of 8/10 years service. 2. As far as the petitioners No. 2 and 3 are concerned, they are totally covered by the judgment delivered in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of HP & Ors, 1994 Supp (2) Supreme Court Cases 316 since they have completed more than 240 days of service in the year 1993 itself and therefore in accordance with the judgment rendered in Mool Raj Upadhyaya's case as explained in Gauri Dutt & Ors. Vs. State of HP, Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366 they are entitled to grant of work charged status on completion of 10 years service with 240 days in each calender year. 3. As far as the petitioners No. 6 and 7 are concerned, they had both completed more than 240 days in the year 1993, but in the year 1994 both are short by 7 days and 14 days only. In my view, since they have rendered continuous service right from 1993 to 2004 and are short by 7 and 14 days respectively there should be condonation of this short period of 7 and 14 days. Therefore, it is ordered that this short period be condoned and they be treated in continuous service from 1993 onwards for the purpose of work charged status. Hence they would be entitled to the same benefits as are given to the similar situated employees. 4. As far as other petitioners are concerned, they are not entitled for the benefits as given in the Mool Raj Upadhyaya case since they did not complete one year's service prior to 31.12.1993. They are however entitled to take the benefit of the subsequent notifications of the Government. It is clarified that these petitioners shall be entitled to the benefit of the scheme(s) for regularization formulated by the State of Himachal Pradesh from time to time and therefore the respondents are directed to consider the case(s) of the petitioners herein for conferment of work charged status subject to their eligibility in terms of the policy dated 3.4.2000 as explained in policy dated 6.5.2000 and in light of the judgment delivered by this Court in CWP No. 2735 of 2010, titled as Rakesh Kumar & Ors. Vs. State of HP & Ors., decided on 28.7.2010. Needless to say that the question of conferment of work charged status does not arise in case the establishment ceases to be a work charged establishment and hence, the conferment of the status will not arise after the abolition of the work-charged status of the establishment. 5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 16th March, 2011 ( Deepak Gupta ) (Krn Guleria) Judge.