IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.10140 of 2008 Date of Decision : May 20, 2010 Sunder Lal Sharma …Petitioner. Versus: State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, Advocate with Ms. Ambika Kotwal, Advocate For respondents 1 & 2: Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. R. M. Bisht & Mr. P. M. Negi, Dy. Advocate Generals. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral). It is the grievance of the petitioner that the period of service rendered by him as a Stenographer w.e.f. 26.8.1986 upto 2.12.1987 has not been considered while promoting him as a Stenographer. 2. Petitioner was initially appointed as a Stenographer on adhoc basis in Project known as Desert Development Project sponsored by the State Government. He made a representation for absorption in the Forest Department of the State. In terms of letter dated 19.11.1984 the State offered him absorption as a clerk and not as a Stenographer. The offer was accepted by the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 petitioner who joined as a clerk on temporary basis w.e.f. 3.12.1984. Thereafter he was promoted as a Stenographer w.e.f. 26.8.1986 which fact is evident from Annexure-PC. The appointment was purely as a stop gap arrangement but however all benefits of pay fixation were accorded to him. This arrangement continued upto 2.12.1987 when he was regularly promoted as a Stenographer. 3. This Court in Uma Dutt Sharma vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Anr. Latest HLJ 2009 (HP) 1268 has held as under:- “7. In the present case also, the petitioner has been appointed on tenure basis, but no period was specified in the appointment letter except that services were liable to be terminated on the joining of regular hand. He has worked continuously for four years. Since he has worked for fairly long period, his appointment cannot be held to be purely on tenure basis. He is required to be treated at par with the persons appointed on ad hoc basis for all intents and purposes. Moreover, there is no difference in the duties discharged by the Teachers appointed on ad hoc basis or tenure basis. The difference is only in the nomenclature. The State Government had also been using the expression “ad hoc”, “tenure” and “contract” loosely. It has decided as per Annexures A-5 and A-6 annexed with M.A. No.3725/2006 to regularize the services on ad hoc/tenure/contract teachers who have completed three years service on or before 31.3.1994. The State has not maintained any distinction between ad hoc and tenure appointees at the time of regularization. The petitioner has also been regularized in the year 1995 with effect from 1.4.1994. He had worked 3 continuously and there is no interruption from 1990 till the date of his regularization. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to count the period with effect from 21.4.1990 to 4.12.1995 for the purpose of increments. The respondents are directed to grant the petitioner necessary increments after counting this period within a period of eight weeks from today. No costs.” 4. The State of Himachal Pradesh has formulated the R&P Rules known as “Senior Scale Stenographer, Class-III (Non- gazetted) in the Department of Forest, Himachal Pradesh” (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). 5. Rule 11 provides for as under:- “11. In case of recruitment by promotion, deputation, transfer grade from which promotion/ deputation/transfer is to be made. By promotion from amongst the Junior Scale Stenographers with 5 years regular service or regular combined with continuous adhoc (rendered upto 31.3.98) service in the grade failing which by deputation/transfer from amongst the incumbents of this post working in the identical pay scale from other H.P. Government Departments. (1) In all cases of promotion, the continuous adhoc service rendered in the feeder post upto 31.3.1998, if any, prior to regular appointment to the post shall be taken into account towards the length of service as prescribed in these rules for promotion subject to the condition that the adhoc appointment/promotion in the feeder category had been 4 made after following proper acceptable process of selection in accordance with the provisions of R&P Rules provided that: (i) in all cases where a junior person becomes eligible for consideration by virtue of his total length of service (including the service rendered on adhoc basis upto 31.3.1998, followed by regular service/ appointment) in the feeder post in view of the provision, referred to above, all persons senior to him in the respective category/post/cadre shall be deemed to be eligible for consideration and placed above the junior person in the field of consideration;………” 6. Keeping in view the relevant provisions of the Rules as also the ratio of law laid down by this Court, the petition needs to be allowed. Adhoc/temporary service needs to be taken into account for according service benefits. 7. Thus the respondents are directed to take the period of adhoc services rendered by the petitioner in the Forest Department w.e.f. 26.8.1986 for the purposes of conferring seniority, service benefits, promotion and pecuniary entitlements. The seniority list be also corrected accordingly. Necessary action be taken by the respondents-Department within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. Arrears, if any, be also paid within the said period, 5 failing which, thereafter petitioner shall be entitled to interest @7%. The petition stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. May 20, 2010 (rana)