IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 2290 of 2008. Decided on 11.08.2010. _____________________________________________________ Smt. Suman Sood. …Petitioner. -Versus- Government of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. D.K. Khanna, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 to 3. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. For respondent No. 4. : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For respondent No. 5. : Mr. B.S. Ranjan, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): The petitioner has already made representations for the redressal of her grievance vide Annexures P-8 to P-12, dated 01.08.1984, 06.01.1994, 24.01.1994, 03.02.1994 and 02.05.1994, respectively. However, the same have not been decided till date. 2. Consequently, the Secretary (Health), Government of Himachal Pradesh is directed to decide the representations made by the petitioner vide Annexures P-8 to P-12 by a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The Secretary (Health) shall also take into consideration the law laid down by this Court in 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Shakuntla Devi Versus the State of Himachal Pradesh and others, 1998 ((2) Sim. L.C. 18. It is made clear that in case the services of the petitioner are regularized, the period spent by her on adhoc basis will be counted for the purpose of increment/pensionary benefits towards the qualifying service. 3. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge August 11, 2010. (bhupender)