1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 5836 of 2011 alongwith CWP Nos. 5845, 5846, 5847, 5848, 5849, 5850, 5851, 5852, 6069, 6071, 6072, 6202 & 6203 of 2011. Decided on: 3.8.2011 1. CWP No. 5836 of 2011 Hem Raj Sharma ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents 2. CWP No. 5845 of 2011 Ramesh Kumar ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents 3. CWP No. 5846 of 2011 Rajan Pathak ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents 4. CWP No. 5847 of 2011 Sulochana Devi ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents 2 5. CWP No. 5848 of 2011 Mohan Lal ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others …Respondents 6. CWP No. 5849 of 2011 Dharam Datt Sharma ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 7. CWP No. 5850 of 2011 Purnima Gupta ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 8. CWP No. 5851 of 2011 Suresh Chand ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 9. CWP No. 5852 of 2011 Puran Dutt ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 3 10. CWP No. 6069 of 2011 Sonu Devi ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 11. CWP No. 6071of 2011 Chanchal Thakur ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 12. CWP No. 6072 of 2011 Vinod Kumar & others ....Petitioners. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 13. CWP No. 6202 of 2011 Vijay Kumar Sharma & others ....Petitioners. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents 14. CWP No. 6203 of 2011 Satish Kumar ....Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …Respondents The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. 4 For the petitioners : Mr. B.S. Thakur, Advocate in CWP No. 5836 of 2011. Mr. R.S. Gautam, Advocate in CWP Nos. 5845, 5846, 5847, 5848, 5849, 5850, 5851 & 5852 of 2011. Mr. Daleep Singh Kaith, Advocate in CWP Nos. 6069, 6071, 6072, of 2011. Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate in CWP No. 6202 of 2011. Ms. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate in CWP No. 6203 of 2011. For the respondents-State : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents-State. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) This issue pertaining to vacation salary to contract teachers is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court rendered in Baldev Singh and others versus State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 415 of 2000, decided on 1st September, 2008 and the judgment has become final. Therefore, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the respondents to release eligible 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 5 copy of the writ petition(s) and a copy of the judgment, referred to above by the petitioner(s). 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. 2. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice August 3, 2011 (Justice Rajiv Sharma) (sck/hl) Judge