1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 6688 of 2011 alongwith CWP Nos. 6689, 7029 & 7033 of 2011. Decided on: 29.8.2011 1. CWP No. 6688 of 2011. Ishwar Chand Sharma Vs. State of H.P. & anr. 2. CWP No. 6689 of 2011. Jagdish Ram Vs. State of H.P. & anr. 3. CWP No. 7029 of 2011. Chet Ram Vs. State of H.P. & anr. 4. CWP No. 7033 of 2011. Madan Lal Vs. State of H.P. & anr. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner(s): Mr. Rajneesh K. Lal, Advocate in CWP Nos. 6688 & 6689 of 2011. Mr. Rupinder Singh, Advocate in CWP Nos. 7029 & 7033 of 2011. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. Advocate General & Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. 2 Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim the benefit of ad-hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension and increments. According to the petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court rendered in LPA No.36 of 2010, Sita Ram vs. State of H.P. As prayed for, it is open for the petitioners to bring this fact to the notice of the respondents, who shall examine the same. Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the respondent concerned to examine the matter in the light of the judgment, referred to above and take appropriate action, within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment, alongwith their representation(s) and a copy of the writ petition(s) as well as a copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner(s). 2. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. August 29, 2011 (Justice Sanjay Karol), (hl/priti) Judge.