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

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral)

The Petitioners claim work charge status/regularisation with all consequential benefits from the date they completed 8 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 & others vs. 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. The Petitioners submit that they would file appropriate representation(s) 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 decision referred to above within a period of another four months. The Petitioner concerned will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the judgments, referred to above, while submitting the representation(s).

With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application(s) if any.