Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/8558/2010 on 29 December 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA.
CWPs No. 8558, 8559 & 8560 of 2010.
Decided on: 29th December, 2010.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. CWP No. 8558 of 2010.
Harbans Lal & Ors.
Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.
2. CWP No. 8559 of 2010.
Mool Raj.
Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.
3. CWP No. 8560 of 2010
Jagdish Chand Sharma & Ors. Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.
Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge.
For the petitioners : Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General,
with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate
General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral)
The issue raised in these writ petitions pertains to the claim made by the petitioners for counting the ad hoc service rendered by them, which is followed by regular service for the purpose of increments and pay fixation. In case the ad hoc service is followed by regularization in the same post, this Court has already held that such service will be counted for increments and pension, as per the judgment dated 15th July, 2010 in LPA No.36 of 2010 titled as Sita Ram vs. State of H.P. and others and the judgment dated 19.5.2009 titled as Paras Ram vs. State of H.P., CWP (T) High Court of H.P. 2010:HHC:13018-DB ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 12:05:38 :::CIS
2 No.7712 of 2008 (Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 887. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the first respondent/competent authority to examine the factual position with regard to the petitioners in these cases also in the light of the law laid down by this Court in the judgments, referred to above and take appropriate action in the matter within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with copies of the judgments, referred to above, by the petitioner concerned.
2. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.
Dasti copy.
(Justice Kurian Joseph),
Chief Justice.
29th December, 2010.
(Justice V.K. Sharma),
(vs) Judge.
High Court of H.P. 2010:HHC:13018-DB ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2026 12:05:38 :::CIS