IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 11436 of 2008. Decided on: 21.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Darau Ram. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Keshav S. Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): The case of the petitioner, in a nutshell, is that he has been appointed in 1993 and had worked thereafter continuously for a period of ten years and completed more than 240 days in each calendar year, but his services have been regularised after 2005. In other words, the submission of the petitioner is that since he had been engaged before 31.12.1993, his case was required to be considered for conferment of work-charged status immediately after completion of ten years service. Mr. Keshav S. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure R-10, which shows that the petitioner 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - had been working continuously since 1993 till 2002 and completed more than 240 days in each calendar year. 2. Consequently, the petition is allowed. There shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for conferment of work-charged status immediately after completion of ten years service, in view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1994, Supp.(2) SCC, 316, within a period of two months after the production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 21, 2010. (sck).