IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 10439 of 2011-D Decided on: 8th December, 2011. Bansi Lal, S/o Sh. Tulsi Ram, R/o Village-Abdulapur, P.O. Zamanabad, Tehsil and Distt. Kangra, H.P. … Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of H.P. , through Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh Shimla-171002. 2. The Director of Higher Education, Govt. of H.P. 3. Director of Elementary Education, Govt. of H.P. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. A.K. Vashista, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. 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. 26.10.1989 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 alongwith consequential benefits..” 2 2. The petitioner claims the benefit of increments during the tenure period of service rendered by his 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 Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioner submits that he would file appropriate representation 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), (kck) Judge.