IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 7089 of 2011 Date of decision: August 29, 2011 Neelam Devi and others Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and others Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge For the Petitioner : Mr. V.D. Khidta, Advocate. For the State: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General ___________________________________________________________ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: - (i) That writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners for promotion and regularization as contingent paid Class-IV Helper-cum- Chowkidar from the date they have completed 8 years continuous service with all consequential benefits including the arrears of salary, seniority etc. (ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to dis- continue giving of appointment on contract basis. (iii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to put the services of the petitioners under the Department instead of Gram Panchayat. (iv) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay the salary for the vacation period during which period, the petitioners have performed their duties. 2 (v) That the respondents may kindly be directed to pay the wages equal to the regularly appointed Class –IV employees on the principle of “equal pay for equal work” (vi) That the respondents may kindly be directed to maintain the seniority list of the petitioners, so that their candidature can be considered for promotion/regularization on the basis of seniority” 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court, dated 21st December, 2010, rendered in CWP No. 7896 of 2010, titled as Jai Singh Versus State of H.P. and others. 3. Therefore, there will be a direction to the second respondent/competent authority to look into the matter, verify the facts and in case the petitioners herein are also similarly situated as the petitioner in the case, referred to above, a similar treatment shall be extended to the petitioners herein also within a period of four months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment alongwith the copy of the writ petition and the copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner before the second respondent/competent authority. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. ( Justice Kurian Joseph ), Chief Justice August 29, 2011 (K) ( Justice Sanjay Karol ), Judge