Rajesh Kumar and Others vs State of H.P.

Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge

Case of the petitioners, in a nut-shell, is that they had been engaged on daily waged basis before 31.12.1993 and worked continuously for a period of 10 years and completed 240 days in each calendar year. However, they have not been conferred work charged status as per Mool Raj Upadhyay''s case. The respondent-State has filed reply. It is evident from para-2 of the reply that the petitioners had been engaged before 31.12.1993 and worked continuously for a period of 10 years and had completed 240 days in each calendar year. However, they have been regularized in the years 1998, 2003, 2006 and 2007, respectively. Since the petitioners had been engaged before 31.12.1993 and completed 240 days in each calendar year, their case was required to be considered for conferment of work charged status as per Mool Raj Upadhyay''s case.

Consequently, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondent-State to confer work charged status to the petitioners, strictly as per dicta of their Lordships of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyaya Vs. State of H.P. and Others, and State of Himachal Pradesh and others versus Gehar Singh, (2007) 12 3 SCC 43, within a period of 10 weeks after the production of certified copy of this judgment. No costs.