IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. (T) No. 1720 of 2008. Decided on: 26th April, 2011. _____________________________________________________ Vattan Singh …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : None. For respondents No. 1 to 3. : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General. None for respondent No. 4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): It is not in dispute that the case of petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment dated 27.10.2009, rendered in Ms. Thakri Devi Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., CWP(T) No. 4357 of 2008. The operative portion of the judgment reads thus: “Keeping in view the letters of the Director of Education, referred to above and the judgment of this Court in CWP(T) No. 7712 of 2008, I feel that the writ petitions must be allowed and the same are accordingly allowed. The respondents are directed to take into consideration the un- interrupted tenure services rendered by the petitioners prior to their regularization for the purpose of calculation of grant of annual increments. The arrear due and payable to the petitioners be paid to them within three months from today, failing which the respondents will be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amounts fall due till payment 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - thereof. The writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid observations. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of petitioner strictly in view of the principles laid down in the judgment cited hereinabove, within a period of eight weeks from today. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 26, 2011. (bhupender) - 3 - `