IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 11161 of 2011-G. Decided on: December 19, 2011. 1. Pushpa Devi W/o Sh.Raj Pal R/O Village Ghangot Post office Ghangot Tehsil Barsar District Hamirpur H.P.-176039 and presently working as Shashtri at Government Middle School Nagrota under complex Government Senior secondary School Chowk Tehsil Sarkaghat District Mandi H.P. 2. Lal Chand S/O Sh. Shiv Ram Resident of Village Guru ka Lahor and Post Office Bassi Tehsil Naina Devi District Bilaspur Government Senior Secondary School Soma Nachani Tehsil Bali Chowki District Mandi H.P. ……….Petitioners. Versus 1. State of H.P. through Principal Secretary Education, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. 2. Director of Elementary Eduction, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-171001. 3. Principal Government Senior Secondary School Soma Nachani Tehsil Bali Chowki District Mandi, H.P. ……….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. For the petitioners: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Ankush Dass Sud, Addl. AG. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The Writ Petition is filed mainly with the following prayer: “i) That the writ in the nature of the mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to extend the benefit of due and admissible merger of 50% Dearness Allowance with basic pay as per memorandum dated 10-06-2005 to the petitioners by further directing the respondents to pay the arrears with all consequential benefits to the petitioners with interest in view of the judgment titled as “Nek Ram Vs State of H.P” i.e. C.W.P. (T) No. 14232/2008.” 2 2. According to the petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in CWP (T) No. 14232 of 2008, titled as Nek Ram & others Versus State of H.P. & others, decided on 17.11.2009. If that be so, similar treatment shall also be extended to the petitioners herein also, as extended to the petitioners in the above referred decision, in case the petitioners are also similarly situated, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner concerned before the second respondent/competent authority. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 19, 2011, ( Justice Dev Darshan Sud), (karan/vs) Judge.