SURAJMANI Vs. STATE OF H. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since through Annexure A-2, the writ petitioners claim qua conferment, upon them, of work charge status, under their employer, became rejected, hence both become constrained, to, through theirs instituting there-against the instant petition, before this Court, seek its annulment.

(2.) The respondents in their reply meted to the instant petition, do not contest, the factum of both the writ petitioners satiating the apposite eligibility criteria, for theirs becoming entitled, to, seek conferment, upon them, of, the benefit of regularization in service. However, Mr. Hemant Vaid, learned Additional Advocate General, with much vigour, contends that their notch in the seniority list, as prepared by the respondents, for, the benefit of the espoused plea of regularization, becoming conferred upon them, is, not yet entitling them to seek any valid conferment upon them, of the afore status, as, (i) there are workmen(s) senior to the writ petitioners in the seniority list, (ii) thereupon, he contends that the benefit of conferment of status of regular employment under the respondents cannot be conferred upon the writ petitioners.

(3.) The learned counsel for the writ petitioners, does not contest, the aforemade contention.