IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPs No. 4952 and 4953 of 2010. Decided on: 4th October, 2010. 1. CWP No.4952 of 2010. Sunil Kumar. ….. Petitioner. Versus Managing Director, HPSIDC and anr. ……Respondents. 2. CWP No.4953 of 2010. Dalip Chand. ……. Petitioner. Versus Managing Director, HPSIDC & anr. …….. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents : None. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) In CWP No.4952 of 2010, the petitioner has made the following prayer: “(1) That writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued and the respondent department may be directed to extend the benefit of work charge status to the petitioner on the completion of 8 years of work charge services or in the alternative the respondents may be directed to grant the regular status on the completion of 10 years in view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court with consequential benefits.” In CWP No. 4953, the petitioner has made the following prayer: 2 “(i) That this Hon’ble Court be kindly pleased to direct the respondent to grant regular status to the petitioner on his completion of 8 years of daily wage services, if the above contention is not accepted, in that eventuality, in the alternative the petitioner be granted the benefit of regular status on the completion of 10 years daily wage services with all consequential benefits.” 2. According to the petitioners, the case is covered by a decision of the Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P. 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316. That decision confers right on the daily waged workmen to claim conferment of work charge status on completion of 10 years of service, apart from regularization subject to availability of vacancies. It is for the petitioners to file an appropriate representation(s) before the first respondent, in which case the matter will be duly examined by the first respondent and appropriate orders thereon shall be filed within another four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition, by the petitioners. 3. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 4th October, 2010 (Justice Kuldip Singh), (tr) Judge.