IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 9316 of 2011. Date of Decision : 01..11.2011 _________________________________________________________ Sudesh Kumari ….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. Onkar Jairth, 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: “I. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the respondents to pay the salary for the vacation period to the petitioner from the day she was appointed on contract basis till date when the petitioner joined as JBT on regular basis i.e. on 10.9.1997 to 1.1.2006, for which the persons appointed on contract basis have been held entitled. Respondents may be further directed to p ay the arrears along with interest @% per annum.” 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