IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 9328 of 2011. Date of Decision : 01..11.2011 _________________________________________________________ Rajinder Kumar ….Petitioner. Versus State of H. P. & Others …Respondents.. _________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Varun Chandel, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. . ______________________________________________________________ R.B. Misra, J. (oral) The writ petition has been filed with the following prayer: “In view of the submissions made herein above, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed that present Civil Writ petition may kindly be allowed and the writ in the nature of mandamus be issued in favour of petitioners and against the respondents with direction them to release salary of vacation period viz from 20.7.1997 to 31st December 2005 with interest to the tune of 7% per annum. Any further order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of law and justice be also passed in favour of petitioner.” 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. It is not disputed by the parties that the issue pertaining to the vacation salary to contract teachers is squarely covered by the decision of the this Court in CWP No. 415 of 2000, titled as Baldev Singh and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others and the judgment has become final. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the due and admissible vacation salary, during the entire service period, to the petitioners in case the same has not been granted so far, within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and the copy of the judgment, referred to above. If the amounts are not disbursed as above, the petitioners will be entitled to interest @ 10% and the officers responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (R.B. Misra) Judge November 01, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), (jai) Judge