1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 10717 of 2011-B Decided on: 13.12.2011 1. Om Prakash, S/o Sh. Bakshi Ram, R/o VPO Hatwar, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Kehar Singh, S/o Shri Krishan Dass, R/o VPO Jangala, Tehsil Jhandutta, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. 3. Inder Singh, S/o Sh. Chand Lal, R/o Village Panyala, P.O. Koki, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. ....Petitioners Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Forest) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-2. 2. The Chief Conservator of Forest, Shimla, H.P. 3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Jogindernagar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. ....Respondents Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents on the grounds mentioned in the body of the writ petition. ________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. 2 For the petitioner : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim work charge status/regularization with all consequential benefits from the date they completed 10 years of continued service. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P. and others, 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316. 2. The learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioners submits 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. The second respondent/competent authority will look into the matter, verify the facts and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, in light also of the decision, referred to above within a period of another four months. The petitioners will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment, referred to 3 above and a copy of the writ petition while submitting the representation(s). 3. The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 13, 2011 (Justice Dev Darshan Sud), (ms/hl) Judge.