JUDGMENT Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral)-We do not intend to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal for the reason that we find that it has been admitted by the petitioners herein that the respondent stands superannuated on 31.12.2006. 2. The controversy, if any, therefore, would be only academic in nature. Moreover, we find that the Tribunal, on the admitted pleadings of the State, directed work charged status to be granted to the respondent herein. This order was passed in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mool Raj Upadhyay vs. State of H.P. 1994 (2) S.L.R. 377. It is undisputed that the State is implementing this decision uniformly. There is, thus, no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s) shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.