IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP Nos. 1916, 1917, 1918 and 1930 of 2011 Date of Decision : April 5, 2011 1. CWP No. 1916 of 2011 Lachhman Dass Thakur and anr. vs. State of H.P. and anr. 2. CWP No. 1917 of 2011 Dimpal Nirala vs. State of H.P. and ors. 3. CWP No. 1918 of 2011 Neelam vs. State of H.P. and ors. 4. CWP No. 1930 of 2011 Ashwani Kumar and ors. vs. State of H.P. and anr. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioners :Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents :Mr. R.K. Bawa, A.G. with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy.A.G. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim the benefit of contract service for the purpose of increment and vacation salary. As far as the increment and pension is concerned, this Court has already held that contract service cannot be equated with ad hoc service followed by regular service and it is for the government to consider the matter. As far as the vacation salary is concerned, the matter is now 2 covered in favour of the petitioners by the decision of this Court in Baldev Singh versus State of H.P. & Others, Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 293. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the second respondent/competent authority to release the vacation salary to the petitioners in case the same has not been granted to them so far. As far as the other grievances are concerned, it will be open to them to approach the first respondent. 2. These writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application (s), if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Sanjay Karol), Judge. April 5, 2011 (PK/Pankaj)