IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3283 of 2011. Decided on 31st May, 2011. Nokhu Ram and another. …Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & another. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the Petitioners : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “(i) That the respondent department may kindly be directed to grant the work charge status/regularization to the petitioner w.e.f. the year 2001 instead of the year 2007/2008 with all consequential benefits like arrears, seniority and other service benefits as per the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the case is squarely covered by the decision of the Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P., 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316. 3. Learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. 2 Petitioners submit that they would file appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for them to do so. Thereafter, the matter will be duly considered by the second respondent in the light of the judgment, referred to above and appropriate action in accordance with law will be taken within another four months from the date of receipt of the representation(s) along with a copy of this judgment and the copy of the judgment, referred to above by the petitioner concerned. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 31st May, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (tr/cs) Judge.