IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3639 of 2009. Decided on: 6th May, 2010. Sunila Sood. ….. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & another. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “(a) That writ of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of completion of 8 years of services in the department as TGT Arts, with further revised pay scale from time to time along with interest.” 2. In the nature of the order, we propose to pass, it is not necessary for us at this stage to go into the merits of the contentions. Suffice to mention that according to the petitioner she has completed more than eight years of service as TGT (Arts) and she is entitled to regularization as the similarly situated teachers have been regularized. But the 2 contention of the State is that all those teachers who were regularized have completed eight years continuous service, whereas in the case of the petitioner her service is not continuous and the first spell from 9.12.1996 to 10.12.1999 is three years and thereafter her re-engagement is only from 2003. But, it is the contention of the petitioner that initial contract was terminated not because the petitioner wanted it but because there was no vacancy available to accommodate the petitioner in the place where she was accommodated, whereas all those teachers who worked where vacancies existed were continued and regularized. Whether in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the Government should, even when there is a break in the service of eight years, regularize her in service is a matter for the Government to consider. 3. Therefore, we dispose of the writ petition directing the first respondent to look into Annexure P-6, representation with notice to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 6th May, 2010. ( Justice R.B. Misra), (tr) Judge.