IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2219 of 2011 along with connected matters. Date of Decision : April 25, 2011 1. CWP No. 2219 of 2011 Piar Singh vs. State of H.P. and anr. 2. CWP No. 2233 of 2011 Manohar Lal vs. State of H.P. and ors. 3. CWP No. 2426 of 2011 Jogesh Kumar vs. State of H.P. and anr. 4. CWP No. 2427 of 2011 Susheel Kumar vs. State of H.P. and anr. 5. CWP No. 2439 of 2011 Tilak Sharma and ors. vs. State of H.P. and anr. 6. CWP No. 2459 of 2011 Baroo Ram vs. State of H.P. and anr. 7. CWP No. 2462 of 2011 Rajender Singh vs. State of H.P. and anr. 8. CWP No. 2463 of 2011 Mohar Singh vs. State of H.P. and anr. 9. CWP No. 2464 of 2011 Kanta Devi vs. State of H.P. and anr. 10. CWP No. 2474 of 2011 Kewal Ram Sharma and ors. vs. State of H.P. and ors. 11. CWP No. 2475 of 2011 Sunita Sharma and ors. vs. State of H.P. and ors. 12. CWP No. 2478 of 2011 Dev Dutt vs. State of H.P. and anr. 13. CWP No. 2479 of 2011 Meera Devi vs. State of H.P. and anr. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioners: Ms. Leena Guleria vice counsel for the respective petitioners. For the respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, A.G. with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl.A.G. and Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy.A.G. 2 Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim the benefit of contract service for the purpose of increment and vacation salary. As far as the increment and pension is concerned, this Court has already held that contract service cannot be equated with ad hoc service followed by regular service and it is for the government to consider the matter. As far as the vacation salary is concerned, the matter is now covered in favour of the petitioners by the decision of this Court in Baldev Singh versus State of H.P. & Others, Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the second respondent/competent authority to release the vacation salary to the petitioners in case the same has not been granted to them so far. As far as the other grievances are concerned, it will be open to them to approach the first respondent. 2. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application (s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. April 25, 2011 (PK/pankaj)