IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP-T No. 8148/2008 Decided on:5.7.2010 _____________________________________________ Avtar Singh. …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Yudhbir Singh, Advocate vice Mr. K.D. Shreedhar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General. _____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner’s case, in a nutshell, is that he be held entitled to the benefit of period he has worked on ad hoc basis for pensionary/ increments. Case of the petitioner is covered by two judgments rendered by this Court in Het Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, CWP (T) No. 8151/2008 decided on and Paras Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another, CWP( T) No. 7712/2008 decided on 19.5.2009, respectively. Accordingly, the petition is partly allowed. Respondents are directed to count the period of ad hoc service rendered by the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 petitioner before his regularization, i.e. 2.12.1998 for the purpose of pensionary/retiral benefits and annual increments. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 5.7.2010 *awasthi*