Bali Mohammad v. The State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Forest)

The State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Forest) to the Govt. of H.P. Shimla-171001.

Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Chamba. .....Respondents Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of appropriate writ, order or directions in view of the facts and circumstances narrated nereinafter. Coram

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma Judge. For the petitioner For the respondents : : Mr. Pushpinder Verma, Advocate vice Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate. R.K. Mr. Advocate Bawa, General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Deputy Advocate General. Vinod Thakur, Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner claims work charge status on completion of eight years of continuous service as daily waged 2 beldar. According to the petitioner, the issue is covered in his favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in CWP No. 2735 of 2010, titled as Rakesh Kumar versus State of H.P. and others, decided on 28.7.2010. It is for the respondents to examine the matter. We are informed that the State has filed an appeal against the above mentioned decision. Therefore, it is made clear that the implementation of the judgment referred to above would depend on the outcome of the decision of the Apex Court. The needful action, after verifying the facts, will be taken within a period of two months from the date of the judgment of the Apex Court. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the second respondent/competent authority.