1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 11498 of 2011-J Decided on: 29.12.2011 Surat Singh, S/o of late Sh. Sant Ram, R/o Village Dehra (Tanda) P.O. Hatwar, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. presently retired as Drawing Master from Govt. Middle School Habot, under complex Govt. Sr. Sec. School Hatwar, Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. ....Petitioner Versus 1. State of H.P. through Secretary (Education), to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171 002. 2. Director of Elementary Education, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171 001. 3. Deputy Director of Elementary Education, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, H.P. ....Respondents Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Vijay Bhatia, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner has two grievances, (i) ad hoc service rendered as JBT teacher is not counted for the purpose of increments and pension; (ii) no vacation salary is paid. But it is 2 seen that the petitioner was not regularized as JBT teacher and his regular appointment is only as a Drawing Teacher. The ad hoc service followed by regular appointment will be counted for increments and pension. However, ad hoc service as JBT teacher will be counted only for pension being a qualifying service, but not for increments. The vacation salary during the ad hoc service, if not paid, shall also be paid to the petitioner in view of the decision of this Court in Baldev Singh & others versus State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 415 of 2000, decided on 1st September, 2008. 2. The needful action, in view of the above declaration, shall be done in the case of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition as well as a copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner before the second respondent. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, as above, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 29, 2011 (Justice Dev Dasrshan Sud), ( ms/hl) Judge. 3