IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No.11780/2008 Decided on:24.2.2011 _____________________________________________ Paras Ram. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. J.L. Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ansul Bansal, Addl. A.G. with Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that though he had completed 8 years of service on 31.3.2000, he has been regularized in the month of December, 2002. In other words, his submission is that since he was engaged in November, 1989 and had completed 240 days continuously for a period of 10 years, he was to be given work charge status on 31.3.2000. Respondents have not denied that petitioner had continuously worked for 10 years and had completed 240 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2 days in each calendar year. In view of this, case of the petitioner was required to be considered for conferment of work charge status, as per Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316, immediately after completion of ten years. 2. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for conferment of work charge status immediately after the completion of 10 years of service with effect from November, 1989 in view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC 316 and State of Himachal Pradesh and others versus Gehar Singh, (2007) 12 SCC 43, within a period of two months, after the production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 24.2.2011 *awasthi*