1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 10895 of 2011-J Decided on: 15th December, 2011. Kshma Sood, W/o Sh. Ankus Sood, R/o V.P.O. Pragpur, Tehsil Dehra, District Kangra, H.P., presently working as (Para Teacher) TGT (Non-Medical) in Government Senior School, Rakkar. Tehsil Dehra, Distt. Kangra, H.P. ......Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through its Principal Secretary (Education) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh. 2. Director of Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. 3. Principal, Government Senior School, Rakkar. Tehsil Dehra, Distt. Kangra, H.P .....Respondents. Civil Writ Petition under Articles of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ order or directions on the grounds mentioned in the body of the writ petition with the prayer to accept the present writ petition in the interest of law and justice. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. 2 For the petitioner : Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, 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 is a para teacher. She is aggrieved since she is not paid the vacation salary and other benefits as are paid to the contract teachers. In the judgment dated 21.10.2010, in CWP No. 2880 of 2010 titled as Dhananjay Saini versus State of H.P. & ors., and connected cases, this Court has held that para teachers are entitled to all the emoluments as are paid to contract teachers, because as per the Government policy, they are to be treated similarly for all purposes. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the eligible vacation salary, during the entire service period to the petitioner, in case the same has not been granted so far, in view of the judgment of this Court in Baldev Singh & others versus State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 415 of 2000, decided on 1st September, 2008, on production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition and a copy of the judgment, referred to above. If the amounts are not disbursed, as above, the petitioner will be entitled 3 to interest @ 10% and the officers responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same. 2. The writ petition is disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 15th December, 2011. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), (sck/hl) Judge.