IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7197 of of 2010. Decided on: 19th November, 2010. Sanjeev Kumar & ors. ….Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. and another. …..Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “(i) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents No.1 and 2 to regularize the services of the petitioner as Trained Graduate Teacher with effect on completion on 8 years service as has been done in the case of similarly situated persons, with all consequential benefits. (ii) That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent State to count period of contract service rendered by petitioners on contract basis as School Cadre TGT Teachers before regularization for the purpose of increments and pension with all consequential benefits along with such interest as this Hon’ble Court deems fit as per law declared by this Hon’ble Court in CWP (T) 7712/2008 Paras Ram vs. State of H.P., LPA 36/2010 Sita Ram vs. State of H.P. and LPA 154/2010 Sarojini 2 Bansal vs State of H.P. and Uma Dutt versus State of H.P. and accordingly grant increments as are due to them within a period of six weeks.” 2. Amongst other contentions, it is submitted that the Government itself has taken a stand in favour of the petitioners as per Annexure P-8, decision in case of the similarly situated persons. Therefore, in the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to look into the matter and in case the petitioners are similarly situated as the incumbents covered by Annexure P-8, order passed by the Government, similar treatment shall be given to the petitioners herein also. The needful, as above, shall be done within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with one set of the writ petition before the first respondent by the petitioner concerned. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. 19th November, 2010. (Justice V.K. Sharma), (tr) Judge. 3