IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPs No. 6541, 6542, 6543, 6544, 6545 & 6546 of 2010. Decided on: 19th November, 2010. 1. CWP No. 6541 of 2010. Reena Kumari. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 2. CWP No. 6542 of 2010. Leela Devi. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 3. CWP No. 6543 of 2010. Archana Kapoor. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 4. CWP No. 6544 of 2010. Purnima Devi. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 5. CWP No. 6545 of 2010. Tek Chand. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 6. CWP No. 6546 of 2010. Hem Raj Sharma. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. R.S. Gautam, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) In these writ petitions, the petitioners have raised two contentions; (1) they are entitled for vacation salary and (2) they are also entitled for counting the service rendered by them on contract basis for the purpose of increments, pension etc. As far as the latter prayer is concerned, it is submitted that the petitioners may be permitted to file 2 appropriate representations before the second respondent. As far as the first issue is concerned, this Court has already held in several judgments that it will be open to the petitioners to execute bonds in the event of the matter now pending before the Supreme Court is allowed, the petitioners will refund the amount granted to them with 10% interest. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of as follows: 2. In the event of the petitioners executing bonds to the effect that they will refund the amount with 10% interest in the event of the matter now pending before the Supreme Court against the judgment of this Court in the case of vacation salary is allowed, they would refund the amount of vacation salary with 10% interest, the vacation salary be disbursed to them within a period of three months from the date of execution of the bonds by the petitioners. 3. As far as the grievance regarding the counting of service rendered during the contract period followed by regular service for the purpose of increments and pension is concerned, the petitioners may file appropriate representations before the first respondent, in which case the matter will be duly considered by the first respondent within another four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment by the petitioner concerned. 4. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. 19th November, 2010. (Justice V.K. Sharma), (vt/tr) Judge.