Bimla Devi Sharma vs State of H.P. and Another

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—Petitioner claims the benefit of ad hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension and increments. According to the Petitioner, the issue is covered in her favour by the judgments of this Court rendered in L.P.A. No. 36 of 2010, Sita Ram v. State of H.P. and Paras Ram v. State of H.P. and Anr. Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 887. As prayed for, it is open for the Petitioner to bring this fact to the notice of the Respondents, who shall examine the same. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the Respondent concerned to examine the matter in the light of the judgments referred to above and take appropriate action within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, alongwith representation and a copy of the writ petition as well as the copies of judgments referred to above, by the Petitioner. Pending application(s), if any also stands disposed of.