Jai Lal and Others vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The Petitioners claim work charge status/regularistion with all consequential benefits 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 v. State of H.P. and Ors., 1994 Supp (2) SCC 313.

The learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. The Petitioners may file individual representation 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 the light also of the decision 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 representation.

The writ petitions stand disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.