IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP Nos. 1538, 1540, 1541, 1542, 1599, 1630, 1666, 1682, 1683 and 1689 of 2011 Decided on: 31.3.2011 1. CWP No. 1538 of 2011 Abhi Kumar vs. State of H.P. and anr. 2. CWP No. 1540 of 2011 Sharvan Kumar vs. State of H.P. and anr. 3. CWP No. 1541 of 2011 Bhoop Singh vs. State of H.P. and anr. 4. CWP No. 1542 of 2011 Halku Ram vs. State of H.P. and anr. 5. CWP No. 1599 of 2011 Janki Das vs. State of H.P. and anr. 6. CWP No. 1630 of 2011 Bhagat Ram vs. State of H.P. and ors. 7. CWP No. 1666 of 2011 Kashmir Singh vs. State of H.P. and anr. 8. CWP No. 1682 of 2011 Dagu Ram vs. State of H.P. and anr. 9. CWP No. 1683 of 2011 Sita Ram vs. State of H.P. and anr. 10. CWP No. 1689 of 2011 Bihari Lal vs. State of H.P. and anr. 2 Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate (in all petitions, except CWP No.1630 of 2011) Mr. Abhyendra Gupta, Advocate (in CWP No. 1630 of 2011) For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim work charge status/regularization with all consequential benefits from the date they 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. The petitioners may file appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the second respondent within a period of one month from today. The second 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 in this judgment while submitting the representation (s). 3 3. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 31st March 2011 (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (BSS/pankaj) Judge.