1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 9974 of 2011-H Decided on: 2.12.2011 Ali Mohammed .....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others .....Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner was initially appointed as JBT teacher on ad hoc basis and thereafter, he was regularly appointed as Drawing Master. The claim of the petitioner for counting the adhoc period of JBT for all service benefits cannot be appreciated. The ad hoc service followed by regular appointment in the same post only attracts such benefits. In the case of the petitioner, the ad hoc service is followed by regular appointment in different capacity. However, the ad hoc service as J.B.T. teacher shall be 2 counted as qualifying service for pension. The writ petition is disposed of, as above, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 2, 2011 (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (hl) Judge.