IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 10934 of 2011-D Date of Decision 19th December, 2011 ________________________________________________________ 1. Ram Krishan, son of Sh. Purkhu, r/o viollage Kuthain, P.O. Chambi, Tehsil Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi H.P. 2. Krishan Chand, son of Sh. Maheshwar Dutt village and P.O. Mahadev, Tehsil Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi H.P. 3. Het Ram, son of Sh. Dutu Ram, village Domhal, P.O. Upper Behli, Tehsil Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi H.P. 4. Sant Ram, son of Sh. Jodha Ram, village Domhal, P.O. Upper Behli, Tehsil Sundernagar, Distt. Mandi H.P. ….Petitioners. Versus. 1. State of H.P. through Secretary (Forest) to the Govt. of H.P. at Shimla H.P. 2. Pr. Chief Conservator of Forest, Shimla H.P. ….Respondents. Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ, in the nature of Mandamus or certiorari, any other appropriate writ, order or direction. _______________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. ________________________________________________________________ For the Petitioners: Mr. Naresh Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass, Sood, Addl. Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. __________________________________________________________________ 2 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 appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for them to do so. The third respondent/competent authority will look into the matter, verify the facts and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, in light also of the decision referred to above within a period of another four months. The petitioner concerned will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment, referred to above and a copy of the writ petition(s), while submitting the representation(s). 3. The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice. December 19, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), ms Judge