Rajiv Sharma, J.

1. This Letters Patent Appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 31.7.2014 rendered in CWP No. 2415 of 2012. "Key facts" necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that the respondent was appointed on daily wage basis in the month of November, 1993. He was regularized on 20.4.2007. Case of the respondent was that he ought to have been regularized immediately after the completion of 8 years as per the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No. 2735 of 2010 dated 28.7.2010. Learned Single Judge decided the writ petition on 31.7.2014 and directed the appellants to comply with the directions issued in Rakesh Kumar v. State of H.P. and Others, subject to the final outcome of the SLP titled State v. Rakesh Kumar pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence, the present appeal.

2. Mr. Hamender Chandel has vehemently argued that services of the respondent have been regularized as per the policy dated 11.4.2007. He has also contended that the policy has been made applicable to the urban local bodies only in the year 2007.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the judgment carefully.

4. Respondent was appointed in th