JUDGMENT Ajay Mohan Goel, J. - By way of this petition, petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- "(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to count the work charge period towards pension and pensionery benefits". 2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are that the petitioner was initially engaged as helper on daily wage basis with respondent No.2- department in the year 1991. Though in the said year he was not permitted to complete 240 days, but thereafter, from the year 1992 onwards, he continued to perform his duty by putting more than 240 days in each calendar year. According to the petitioner, rather than regularizing his services, his services were transferred on secondment basis to respondent No.3, against the post of Peon, vide order dated 14.05.2007. Petitioner joined the new department. It is further the case of the petitioner that regularization/work charge status was conferred upon the petitioner w.e.f. 2004, whereas he was entitled for it from the year 2002. 3. In these circumstances, petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court i.e. CWP No.10864 of 2011, which was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 14.08.2012, in terms whereof, it was ordered by this Court that petitioner was entitled for being conferred work charge status w.e.f. 01.01.2002 instead of 01.01.2004. It was further ordered by the Court that consequential action be taken in this regard within a period of three months as from the date of passing of the judgment of this Court. It is not in dispute that this judgment passed by the Court stands implemented and petitioner was conferred work charge status w.e.f. 01.01.2002. Thereafter, his services have also been regularized w.e.f. 01.10.2007. Copy of Order dated 01.10.2007 is appended with the petition as Annexure P-1. 4. As already mentioned hereinabove, prayer of the petitioner in this case is that his work charge period be counted towards the pension and pensionary benefits. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the documents which have been appended with the pleadings. 6. 4. As already mentioned hereinabove, prayer of the petitioner in this case is that his work charge period be counted towards the pension and pensionary benefits. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the documents which have been appended with the pleadings. 6. It is not in dispute that the issue as to whether the service rendered by an employee as a work charge has to be counted towards qualifying service for the purpose of pension, is no more res integra and the same stands decided in favour of the work charge employee by this Court, in numerous cases. One of the said judgment is passed in CWP No.6167 of 2012, titled as Sukru Ram Versus the State of Himachal Pradesh & others, decided on 06.03.2013, relevant portion of which is quoted hereinbelow:- "In this view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to count the services rendered by the petitioner as work-charged employee towards qualifying service and then calculate the pension payable to the petitioner. Such action shall be taken within a period of eight weeks from today. Writ petition is disposed of". 7. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that it is undisputed that work charge period of the present petitioner has to be counted for the purpose of counting his pension and other pensionery benefits, this writ petition is allowed by directing the respondents to count the service rendered by the petitioner as work-charged employee towards qualifying service for the purpose of calculating the pension which is payable to the petitioner, as well as other pensionery benefits. Necessary action in this regard be taken within a period of three months from today. Petition is disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of.