IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 6405 of 2010. Decided on: October 8, 2010. Vinod Kumar & ors. ….. Petitioners. Versus State of H.P & anr. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K.Bawa, AG, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed, mainly with the following prayers: “i) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent State to regularize the services of the petitioners as Veterinary Officers on completion of six years of service on the same analogy as is being done by State with regard to MBBS Medical Officers employed on contract basis. ii) Direct the Respondents by way of issuance of writ of Mandamus to grant earned leave to the petitioners as per CCS Leave Rules and to grant maternity leave of 135 days instead of 84 days to lady Veterinary Officers serving State on Contract basis and 15 days paternity leave to Male Veterinary Officers serving the State on Contract basis and quash office order Annexure P 8 reducing maternity leave from 135 to 84 days. iii) Direct the Respondents by way of issuance of writ of Mandamus to allow the petitioners to appear in the Departmental Examination while serving the State on contract basis.” 2 2. Since the petitioners have essentially sought for writ of mandamus, it is for them to approach the first respondent. The petitioners pray that the Writ Petition itself may be treated as a representation. Though, normally we do not grant such a relief since the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be treated as representation but in view of the voluminous material produced by the petitioners in the Writ Petition and since copy has already been served upon the first respondent, we are of the view that it is only appropriate that the first respondent looks into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law in the matter. 3. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to treat the memorandum of Writ Petition as representation and take appropriate action thereon in accordance with law. This shall be done within a period of 4 months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the Writ Petition by any of the petitioners. In case the petitioners seek an opportunity for hearing, any two of them may be granted such an opportunity. We also make it clear that it will be open to the petitioners to file a supplementary representation producing any material thereon to bring it to the notice of the Government. 4. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice October 8, 2010. ( Justice Rajiv Sharma ), (karan) Judge.