IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA. CWP No.: 11103 of 2011-A. Decided on: 21.12.2011. Shri Durga Dass son of Shri Keshav Ram, resident of village Dadoh, Post Office Bassi, Tehsil Chachoit, District Mandi, presently Forest Worker under DFO, Nachan at Bassa (Gohar), District Mandi, H.P. … Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through its Secretary (Forest), Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla – 171 002. 2. Divisional Forest Officer, Nachan Forest Division at Bassa, (Gohar), District Mandi, H.P. … Respondents. Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. _____________________________________________ Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. _____________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Tek Chand Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer(s):- - 2 - “ I. That the respondents may kindly be directed to allow/confer work-charge status as Forest Worker in favour of petitioner w.e.f. 1st Jan., 1994 with its consequential service benefits according to the decision of the Apex Court. II. That the respondents may kindly be directed to allow/confer work-charge status of Forest Worker w.e.f. 1-1-94 till regular appointment with all its consequential benefits including arrear of pay etc. along with interest.” 2. The petitioner claims work charge status/ regularization with all consequential benefits from the date he has completed 10 years of continuous 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. 3. The learned Additional Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioner submits that he would file appropriate representation furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for him to do so. The second respondent/competent authority will look into the matter, verify the facts and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, in the light also of the decision referred to above, within a period of another four months. The petitioner will produce a copy of this - 3 - judgment along with a copy of the judgment, referred to above, while submitting the representation. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice (Justice Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 21, 2011. (sck/hl).