Kameshwar Dutt vs State of H.P. and Another

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

(i) That the Respondents may kindly be directed to count the ad hoc period of service rendered by the Petitioner for fixation of pay by allowing him all the increments from the date of his initial appointment as per the law settled by this Hon''ble Court in CWP (T) No. 7712 of 2008 decided on 19.5.2009, Uma Dutt Sharma v. State and the period may also be counted towards pensionary benefits as decided in LPA No. 36/10 titled Sita Ram v. State.

It is submitted that the issue is covered by the judgment of this Court in Paras Ram v. State of H.P., CWP (T) No. 7712 of 2008 decided on 19.5.2009 (Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 887), which has been implemented also. If that be so, there is no point in discriminating the Petitioner in case the Petitioner is similarly situated as the Petitioner covered by the judgment, referred to above. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as follows:

In the event of the Petitioner filing a representation within a period of one month from today before the first Respondent, the said Respondent will consider the same in the light of the judgment, referred to above and in case the Petitioner is similarly situated as the Petitioners in the judgment referred to above, the Petitioner herein also shall be entitled to all the consequential benefits. The needful in this regard and also disbursing the benefits shall be done within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and the copy of the judgment referred to above by the Petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any.