IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) 4826 of 2008. Decided on: 29th July, 2010. Tilak Raj Sharma. ….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner : None. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The application was filed with the following prayers: “(i) That the stipulation in the order of the appointment of applicant and terms and conditions incorporated therein that the appointment of applicant would be only for a particular session co terminus with the termination of academic session and commencement of Winter Vacations, may kindly be quashed and set aside. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to continue the applicant in service as a result of his initial appointment till he is replaced by regularly appointed teacher duly selected by Public Service Commission that too for making room for such regularly appointed teachers, if there is no vacancy available for such appointee. (iii) That while replacing the applicant and other by regularly selected teachers, the respondents may be directed to follow the principle of ‘last come first go’. 2 (iv) That the respondents may be restrained from giving notional and fictional breaks to the applicant for the period(s) of Summer/Winter vacation/Dushera Holidays and applicant may be held entitled to the salary for such vacations/holidays and he may also be held entitled to arrears for the period(s) for which he has been deprived of salary for such vacation/holidays. (v) That the applicant may also be held entitled to the benefits of regularization of his service pursuant to Scheme framed (Annexure A-9).” 2. On 25th May, 1998, we find that some interim order to the effect that the applicant would be permitted to continue in the post till regular hand joins duty was passed. The issue regarding vacation salary has been dealt with in the decision of this Court in Baldev Singh and others vs. State of H.P. and others, reported in Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293, wherein at para 15 it has been held that: “………The teachers were appointed on contract basis have worked for a period of more than 2 to 3 years and cannot be deprived of the benefit of salary for the vacation period.” 3. In case the judgment has become final and in case the petitioner has not been paid the vacation salary, the same shall be released to him within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. In case the petitioner has still any grievance left, he may approach the second respondent, in which case the second respondent will consider the matter, with notice to the petitioner and appropriate action 3 in accordance with law and justice thereon shall be taken within another four months. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 29th July, 2010 ( Justice Rajiv Sharma), (tr) Judge.