IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP Nos 9894-J, 9896-J, 9958-F & 9961-G of 2011. Decided on: 29th November, 2011. 1. CWP No. 9894 of 2011-J Devinder Singh Negi Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. 2. CWP No. 9896 of 2011-J Vijay Ram Sharma Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. 3. CWP No. 9958 of 2011-F Dev Raj Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. 4. CWP No. 9961 of 2011-G Amar Singh Bijaik Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Surinder Prakash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petitions are filed with the following prayer: “A) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order, directing the respondents to count the Tenure service of the petitioner for the purpose of increments and pension from his initial appointment on tenure basis till the date of his regularization with all consequential benefits of pay, arrears and pension etc.” 2. The petitioners claim the benefit of increments during the tenure period of service rendered by them and also count the said period for the purpose of pension. According to the petitioners, the issue is covered in their 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. Petitioners submit that they would file appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for them to do so. 4. Therefore, the writ petitions are 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 petitioners. 5. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 29th November, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (bhatt/krs) Judge. 2