1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 16620 of 2008. Date of Decision: 24th December, 2010. Chhonjor Dorge …..Petitioner. Versus State of HP and another …..Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. R.M. Bisht, Dy. A.G. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral). Petitioner has prayed the following reliefs: “(i) That the Respondents may very kindly be directed to count the adhoc service rendered by the applicant from 28.9.1983 to 16.8.1989 towards seniority, promotion and other consequential benefits. (ii) That the applicant may also be held entitled for earning annual increments during the adhoc service rendered with the Respondent Department and he may be granted the stagnation scale due to him at the completion of 8 years of service. (iii) That the entire records pertaining to the facts and circumstances of the case may also be summoned from the respondents for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Tribunal. (iv) That any other relief to which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper may also be passed in favour of 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 the applicant and against the respondents in the interest of justice.” According to Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, matter in issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 36 of 2010, dated 15th July, 2010, Sita Ram Vs. State of H.P & others. Copy of which is taken on record. 2. In the instant case, facts are similar. From the record, it is evident that the petitioner has served the State w.e.f. 28th September, 1983 on ad hoc basis as TGT Arts, till the time, he was regularized in terms of order dated 16.6.1989. Keeping in view the decision rendered in Sita Ram (supra), present petition is disposed of with a direction that the directions issued in Sita Ram (supra) shall mutatis mutandi apply to the instant case as well . 3. Respondents are directed to do the needful within a period of three months from the receipt of certified copy of the order. 4. With these observations, present petition is disposed of. (Sanjay Karol) Judge December 24, 2010 (KRS)