IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 10366 of 2011-G. Decided on: 8th December, 2011. Ashok Kumar, S/o Sh. Duni Chand, R/o Village and P.O. Bangoli, Tehsil and Distt. Kangra, H.P., presently working as Lecturer in History, G.S.S.S. Sakri, Tehsil Dehra, Distt. Kangra, H.P. ....Petitioner Versus 1. State of H.P. through Secretary (Education), to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171002. 2. Director of Higher Education, Govt. of H.P. 3. Director of Higher Education, Govt. of H.P. ....Respondents Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ order and direction. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “i) writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant the benefit of pay fixation and counting of the tenure service for the purpose of pension w.e.f. 10.8.1987 to 31.3.1994 the due date in favour of the petitioner as has been allowed to similarly placed persons in the department of Education, Government of Himachal Pradesh along with consequential benefits”. 2. The petitioner claims the benefit of increments during the tenure period of service rendered by him and also count the said period for the purpose of pension. According to the petitioner, the issue is covered in his favour by the judgment of this Court dated 16.12.2010 rendered in CWP No. 4550 of 2010 titled as Ravi Kumar vs. State of H.P. & others. 3. Learned Additional Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioners submit that they would file appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for him to do so. 4. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent concerned to examine the matter and verify the facts in the light of the judgment referred to above and take appropriate action thereon within a period of four months from the date of the 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. 5. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 8th December, 2011. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), (bhatt/krs) Judge. 2