1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3645 of 2011 Decided on: 5.8.2011 Mast Ram ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner : Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner has two grievances, (i) counting of period rendered as J.B.T. for the purpose of increments and pension and (ii) counting of period of ad hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension. As far as the first grievance is concerned, it has already been held by this Court that the J.B.T. period will only be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension only, in terms of Rule 13 of the Pension Rules. As far as the second grievance is concerned, in case the ad hoc service is followed by regular service in the same post, the said service shall be counted for the purpose of increments and pension, in terms of the judgment of this Court rendered in LPA No. 36 of 2010, titled 2 as Sita Ram vs. State H.P. & others, decided on 15.7.2010. The needful, in the light of what is stated above, shall be done within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition and a copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner before the second respondent/competent authority. 2. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice August 5, 2011 (Justice V.K. Ahuja) (hl) Judge