IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 11892/2008 Decided on:27.12.2010 _____________________________________________ Huma Devi and another. …Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and another. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Case of the petitioners, in a nutshell, is that though they had been engaged before 31.12.1993, however, they have not been conferred with work charge status after completion of ten years continuous service with 240 days in each calendar year. 2. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexures R-IV and R-V, i.e. mandays’ charts qua the petitioners. A bare perusal of these mandays’ charts makes it abundantly clear that the petitioners were engaged in the year 1991 and have completed 240 days in each 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 calendar year continuously for ten years. However, they have been regularized in the year 2003. Once, they have been engaged before 31.12.1993, their cases for regularization were required to be considered as per law laid down by their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhaya versus The State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316. 3. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for conferment of work charge status immediately after the completion of ten years continuous service 1991 onwards within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioners. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 27.12.2010 *awasthi*