IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 4430 of 2011. Date of Decision : July 4, 2011 Vijay Kumari … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr. Narender Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R. K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. and Mr. J. K. Verma, Dy. A.G.. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner claims work charge status/regularization with all consequential benefits from the date she completed 10 years of continued service. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in Mool Raj Upadhyaya vs. State of H.P. and others, 1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316. 2. The learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioner submits that she 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 her to so. The second respondent/competent authority will look into the matter, verify the facts and pass appropriate orders thereon in 2 accordance with law, in light also of the decision referred to above within a period of another four months. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment, referred to above, while submitting the representation. 3. The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. July 4, 2011 (PK/Priti)