IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 9823 of 2008. Decided on 14th December, 2010. Sukhdev. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Raman Sethi, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that he was engaged in 1991. He has completed 10 years’ continuous service with 240 days in each calander year till 2000. Since the petitioner has been appointed before 31.12.1993, his case is covered by judgment rendered by their Lordships of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Versus State of H.P. and others, 1994 (2) SLR, 377. 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of petitioner for conferment of work charge status immediately after completion of 10 years continuous service with 240 days in each calander year with all consequential benefits, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 14, 2010. (bhupender) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No.