Subhash Chand Sharma vs State of H.P. and Another

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The Petitioners have two grievances, namely, (i) that they have not granted the vacation salary and (2) that they have not granted the increments.

They are contract employees. As far as the vacation salary is concerned, this Court has already issued several directions that depending on the final decision from the Apex Court in Baldev Singh and Ors. v. State of H.P. and Ors. Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, the vacation salary be given to the incumbents on their executing a bond to the effect that in case the decision in the Apex Court is against the employees, they would refund the amount with 10% interest. There shall be a direction accordingly in the case of the Petitioners also that on executing the bond, the vacation salary shall be disbursed to them within another two months.

As far as the counting of the contract period for the purpose of increments and pensionary benefits is concerned, it is for the Petitioners to approach the Government by appropriate representation(s), in which case the matter will be duly considered by the State Government in the light of the decision of this Court dated 16th December, 2010 in CWP No. 4550 of 2010 titled as Ravi Kumar v. State of H.P. and Anr. 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 copies of the judgments, referred to above, by the Petitioner concerned.

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