Rakesh Kumar and Others vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—Petitioners have filed these writ petitions with the following prayers:

CWP No. 5413 of 2010

(i) That the petitioner is entitled for grant of work charge status in terms of judgment passed by this Hon''ble court in Rakesh Kumar v. State of H.P. in CWP No. 2735 of 2010, decided on 28.7.2010.

(ii) That the arrears w.e.f. completion of 8 years with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(iii) That actual benefit of 8 years service be given for work charge status.

(iv) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. after completion of 8 years with 240 days in one calendar year.

CWP No. 5414 of 2010

(i) That the petitioner is entitled for grant of work charge status w.e.f. 7.2.2004 instead of 7.1.2007 as per the judgment by the Apex Court in Mooj Raj Upadhayay v. State of H.P.

(ii) That the benefits as are due and admissible as per the judgment passed by the Hon''ble court in Mool Raj Upadhayay v. State of H.P. may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

(iii) That the arrears w.e.f. 7.2.2004 to 7.1.2007 with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(iv) That That the actual benefit of 8 years services be given for work charge status.

(v) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. 7.2.2004 to 7.1.2007.

CWP No. 5415 of 2010

(i) That the petitioner is entitled for grant of work charge status in terms of judgment passed by this Hon''ble court in Rakesh Kumar v. State of H.P. in CWP No. 2735 of 2010, decided on 28.7.2010.

(ii) That the arrears w.e.f. completion of 8 years with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(iii) That actual benefit of 8 years service be given for work charge status.

(iv) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. after completion of 8 years.

CWP No. 5416 of 2010

(i) That the petitioner is entitled for grant of work charge status in terms of judgment passed by this Hon''ble court in Rakesh Kumar v. State of H.P. in CWP No. 2735 of 2010, decided on 28.7.2010.

(ii) That the arrears w.e.f. completion of 8 years with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(iii) That actual benefit of 8 years service be given for work charge status.

(iv) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. after completion of 8 years with 240 days in one calendar year.

CWP No. 5448 of 2010

(i) That the petitioner is entitled for grant of work charge status w.e.f. 5.2.2004 instead of 22.12.2006 as per the judgment by the Apex Court in Mooj Raj Upadhayay v. State of H.P.

(ii) That the benefits as are due and admissible as per the judgment passed by the Hon''ble court in Mool Raj Upadhayay v. State of H.P. may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

(iii) That the arrears w.e.f. 5.2.2004 to 22.12.2006 with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(iv) That the actual benefit of 8 years services be given for work charge status.

(v) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. 05.2.2004 to 22.12.2006.

CWP No. 5449 of 2010

(i) That the petitioner is entitled for grant of work charge status w.e.f. 5.2.2004 instead of 10.01.2007 as per the judgment by the Apex Court in Mooj Raj Upadhayay v. State of H.P.

(ii) That the benefits as are due and admissible as per the judgment passed by the Hon''ble court in Mool Raj Upadhayay v. State of H.P. may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

(iii) That the arrears w.e.f. 5.2.2004 to 10.01.2007 with interest may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(iv) That the actual benefit of 8 years services be given for work charge status.

(v) That the seniority and consequential benefits may also be granted in favour of the petitioner w.e.f. 05.2.2004 to 10.01.2007.

We are informed that the judgment in CWP(T) No. 7712 of 2008 has become final in view of the judgment in LPA No. 36 of 2010 Rakesh Kumar v. State of H.P. and Ors.

There will be a direction to the respondents to take appropriate action in the case of the petitioners also, in light of the judgments, referred to above, within a period of four months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment alongwith the copy of the writ petition by the petitioners.

The writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.