IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos. 4134 of 2011 Decided on 16.6.2011. Dinesh Kumar vs. State of H.P. and ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Rakesh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice (oral). The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- “(i) That the petitioner is entitled for the grant of work charge status with effect from due date, i.e., January, 2003 instead of 31.07.2006 as per the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyay V/S State of H.P. (ii) That the benefits as are due and admissible as per the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyay V/S State of H.P. may kindly be granted to the petitioner. (iii) That the arrears w.e.f. due date, i.e., January, 2003 in stead of 31.07.2006 with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner. (iv) That the actual benefits of 8 years service be given for work charge status. (v) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f due date, i.e., January, 2003 instead of 31.07.2006.” 2 2. According to the petitioner, his case is covered by the decision of Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and others 1994 Supplement (2) S.C.C. 313. Petitioner submits that he would file an appropriate representation furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for him to do so. The first respondent/competent authority will look into the matter, verify the facts and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, in light of the decision referred to above within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of the judgment referred to above and a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner before the first respondent. 3. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice (Justice V.K. Sharma) Judge. June 16, 2011 (LSP/pankaj)