Harbans Lal and Others vs State of H.P. and Others

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—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 v. State of H.P. and others and the judgment dated 19.5.2009 titled as Paras Ram v. State of H.P., CWP (T) 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.

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