JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (oral) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 13.12.2010, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP(T) No. 9484 of 2008, titled as Gurmail Singh & others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, whereby and whereunder, the writ petition came to be allowed, hereinafter referred to as “the impugned judgment”, on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. It is apt to reproduce para-2 of the impugned judgment herein : “2. Since the petitioners have been regularized as per Annexure P-21, dated 28th January, 1999, there shall be a direction to the respondents to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioners at par with the regularly appointed employees, i.e. provident fund, medical leave, casual leave, earned leave, medical reimbursement, annual increments, house rent etc. within a period of eight weeks after the production of certified copy of this judgment, if not already paid.” 2. Heard. The impugned judgment on the face of it, is not tenable in terms of Annexure P-21, wherein it has been provided that the State has made order in respect of 28 daily waged workers working in various Industrial Area Development Agencies and not in respect of the daily wagers being appellants, herein. 3. The judgment is not speaking one. However, we have gone through the writ petition. The writ petitioners have sought the following main reliefs amongst others : “(a). To direct the respondents to grant the petitioners the benefit such as the provident fund, medical leave, casual leave, earned leave, medical reimbursement, uniforms or allowance thereof, annual increments, house rent allowance and other benefits which are applicable/admissible/available to the similarly situated persons/regular employees of the State Govt. of H.P., Industries Department, DICs and also the HPSIDC with effect from 28.1.1999 with all the consequential benefits; (b) to direct the respondents to treat the petitioners as the regular employees of either the HPSIDC or the Industries Department/DICs of the Industries Deptt. of the State Govt. of H.P., Industries Department, DICs and also the HPSIDC with effect from 28.1.1999 with all the consequential benefits; (b) to direct the respondents to treat the petitioners as the regular employees of either the HPSIDC or the Industries Department/DICs of the Industries Deptt. of the State Govt. of HP and further they may kindly be directed to grant all the service benefits, as aforesaid, as are admissible to the employees of the aforesaid organizations with effect from 28.1.1999 with all the consequential benefits; or in the alternative, in case this Hon’ble Tribunal cames to the conclusion that the petitioners are the regular employees of the IADAs, in that eventuality, in view of the decision taken by the State Government of Himachal Pradesh, dated 28.1.1999, Annexure P-21 supra, the State Government of Himachal Pradesh may kindly be directed to provide adequate financial assistance/grant-in-aid to the IADAs to meet the expenses/liabilities of paying salary and allowances and other benefits to the petitioners and other similarly situated persons/employees of the State Government of Himachal Pradesh; (c) To direct the respondents to pay all the arrears and consequential reliefs to the petitioners alongwith the interest at the rate of 9% per annum from and with effect from 28.1.1999 till the final payment is made to the petitioners.” 4. In view of Annexure P-21, supra, we deem it proper to modify the impugned judgment by directing the respondents-State, i.e. respondents No. 1 to 7 herein to consider the case of the writ petitioners and pass appropriate order in light of Annexure P-21, within six weeks and report compliance before the Additional Registrar (Judicial). 5. Accordingly, the impugned judgment is modified, as indicated above and the appeal is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti to the learned Advocate General.