Bhikham Ram and Others vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The Petitioners claim work charge status/regularistion 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, and the decision rendered by this Court in Gauri Dutt and Ors. v. State of H.P. Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 366.

The learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioners submits that they would file appropriate representations 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 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 decisions referred to above within a period of another four months. The Petitioners will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgment, referred to above, while submitting the representations.

The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.