IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.8458 of 2010. Decided on: 6th January, 2011. Onkar Sharma. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & another. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner has two grievances, namely, (i) regarding counting of ad hoc service towards increments and pensionary benefits in view of the decision in LPA No.36 of 2010 titled as Sita Ram vs. State of H.P. & others and (ii) for the grant of vacation salary. 2. As far as the vacation salary is concerned, according to the learned Deputy Advocate General the issue is now pending before the Apex Court. The petitioner will execute a bond that in case the decision of the Apex Court in Baldev Singh and others vs. State of H.P. and others, Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293 is against the petitioner, he would refund the vacation salary with 10% interest. On executing that bond, the vacation salary shall also be paid to the petitioner within another two months. 2 3. As far as the counting of the ad hoc service for the purpose of increments and pensionary benefits is concerned, the ad hoc service shall be counted for the purpose of increments and pensionary benefits in view of the decision rendered in LPA No.36 of 2010 titled as Sita Ram vs. State of H.P. and others within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and copies of the judgments, referred to above, by the petitioner. 4. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 6th January, 2011 (Justice V.K. Sharma), (tr) Judge. 3