IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 12027 of 2008. Decided on: 7.1.2011. ___________________________________________________________ Jai Kara and another. … Petitioners. Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. R.D. Kaundal, Advocate vice Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy.A.G. ___________________________________________________________ Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge (Oral). The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioners is covered under the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of H.P. and others, 1994 Supp (2) Supreme Court Cases 316. 2. In view of the above, if on facts the case of the petitioners is covered under the judgment referred to hereinabove, they shall also be treated similarly without any discrimination and benefit of the said judgment along with consequential benefits, if any, shall be extended to them within three months from the date of production of copy of this judgment by the petitioner and they shall also be vested with the work-charged status/regularized as Beldar from due dates, failing which interest at the rate of 9% per annum shall also be payable. 3. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. January 7, 2011. (cr) 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2