IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 11327 of 2008. Decided on: 24.12.2010. Bali Ram. ……….Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Another. ……….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner. : Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.K.Verma, Deputy Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner was appointed in 1990. He had completed more than 10 years of service with 240 days in each calendar year as per Annexure R- 1. However, he has been regularized with effect from 24th September, 2002. Since the petitioner has been engaged before 31.12.1993, his case was required to be considered as per judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in ‘Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994, Supplement (2) 316. 2. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for conferment of 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?. No. work charge status immediately after completion of 10 years of service in view of law laid down in Mool Raj Upadhyaya ‘s case. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) December 24, 2010. Judge (krt)