CWP(T) No. 9178 of 2008 08.10.2010 Present: Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Vivek Thakur, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. A.G. for the respondents/State. It is not in dispute that petitioners were engaged as daily waged workers on different dates in the year 1984. It is also not disputed that petitioners stand regularised sometime in the month of January, 1998. Petitioners however are seeking the benefits of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others (1994) Suppl. (2) SCC 316. It is their claim that their services ought to have been regularised w.e.f. 1994 and not 1998. The State has denied petitioners’ claim and contention. 2. This Court in Gauri Dutt and others versus State of H.P., Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366 after considering Mool Raj Upadhyaya’s case (supra) has held that such of those employees who were employed prior to 1993 would be automatically entitled to work charged status after completion of the stipulated period. This was subject to fulfillment of certain conditions. 3. It is not in dispute that petitioners fulfill such conditions. 4. Consequently a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the petitioners case in the light of the directions issued in Mool Raj Upadhyaya (supra) and Gauri Dutt (supra) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy -2- of the order. Consequential action of release of arrears shall also be taken within the aforesaid period. It is clarified that if the arrears are not disbursed within the aforesaid period then thereafter petitioners shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. October 8, 2010 (PK)