IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 3611 of 2011. Decided on: May 30, 2011. Parshotam Singh. Versus State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. J.K. Verma, Dy. AG. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioner claim the benefit of ad hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension and increments. According to the petitioner, the issue is covered in his favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in LPA 36 of 2010, Sita Ram versus State.. It is for the respondents to examine the matter. The petitioner submits that he would file appropriate representation furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of ten days from today. It is always open for him to do so. As and when the same is made, the second respondent/competent authority will look into the matter, verify the facts and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner before the second respondent. 2. The Writ Petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. May 30, 2011. ( Justice Sanjay Karol), (vs) Judge.