IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 8774 of 2008. Date of Decision : December 21, 2010 Chet Ram Petitioner Versus Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni. Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondent : Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate, for the respondent. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) From the reply filed by the respondent, it is apparent that petitioner was regularized in the year 1998. From the man days chart indicated by the respondent in their reply, it is apparent that w.e.f. 1984, petitioner has completed more than ten years of continuous period of service with minimum 240 days in each English calendar year proceeding 12 months. Thus, petitioner was entitled for benefits accrued by virtue of the decision rendered by Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Versus State of H.P and others, 1994 Supp (2) SCC, 316. He was to be accorded work charge status from the year 1994 instead of 1998 as has been so done by the State. Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 The action being contrary to the settled position of law needs to be rectified. 2. To this extent, respondents are directed to accord all benefits to the petitioner in view of the law laid down by Apex Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya (supra). Consequential action shall be taken within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. Amount due and admissible, if any, be also disbursed to the petitioner within the aforesaid period, failing which thereafter petitioner shall be entitled to the interest at the rate of 9 % per annum. 3. With the aforesaid observations, the present petition stands disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge December 21, 2010 CS