Gurdev Singh Mehta vs H.P. and Another

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The Petitioners claim the benefit of ad hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension and increments. According to the Petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in LPA No. 36 of 2010, Sita Ram v. State.

Learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioners submit that they would file appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for them to do so.

Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the Respondent concerned to examine the matter, after verifying the facts, in the light of the judgment referred to above and take appropriate action thereon within a period of four months from the date of the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and the copy of the judgment referred to above.

The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.