Pratap Singh vs Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and Executive Engineer, HPSEBL

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The petitioner claims the benefit of the decision of the Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and Others, and claims work charge status on completion of ten years of daily waged service with 240 days per year. In any case, as rightly pointed out by the learned Dy. Advocate General, there cannot be work charge status prior to 1.1.1994. The claim for regularization will be considered only subject to the availability of vacancies. All these aspects, the petitioner pray, he may be permitted to bring to the notice of the third respondent. It is open for him to do so. In the event of the petitioner filing representation furnishing his service particulars, the matter will be considered and appropriate action will be taken in accordance with law within four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment alongwith the representation by the petitioner before the third respondent. The writ petition is disposed of, so also pending applications, if any.