IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 6 of 2010. Decided on: 22.11.2011. _______________________________________________ Sushma Devi. … Petitioner. Versus Agro Industrial Packaging India Ltd. & Another. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner had been working continuously with the respondents and completed 240 days in a block of 12 calendar months with effect from 1993 onwards. However, her services have been regularised only in the year 2007. Since the petitioner had continuously been working with effect from 7th April, 1993 and completed ten years’ of service in the year 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - 2003 with 240 days in a block of 12 calendar months, her case was required to be considered for conferment of work charge status as per law laid down in Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316. 2. Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for conferment of work charge status with all consequential benefits with effect from 31st March, 2003, within a period of ten weeks after the production of certified copy of the judgment by the petitioner before the competent authority. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. November 22, 2011. (sck).