IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 11428 of 2011 Date of Decision 27th December, 2011 ________________________________________________________ Sarita Kumari, wife of Ramesh Singh, resident of village Yanwin, P.O. Dhamrol, Tehsil Bhoranj, Distt. Hamirpur presently working as Drawing Master, (Para Teacher) at Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Pahal, Distt. Shimla HP ….Petitioner. Versus. 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through its Principal Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. 2. Director, Elementary Education to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. 3. Principal Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Pahal Tehsil Dalhousie, Distt. Chamba. 4. Headmaster Govt. Middle School Janjelli U/c Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Kangol Distt. Shimla. 5. Treasury Officer, Shimla, Distt. Shimla. ….Respondents. Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. _______________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. ________________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajinder Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass, Sood, Addl. Advocate General. __________________________________________________________________ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (oral) The petitioner is the para-teacher. She is aggrieved since she is not paid the vacation salary and other benefits as 2 are paid to the contract teachers. In the judgment dated 21.10.2010, in CWP No. 2880 of 2010 titled as Dhananjay Saini Vs. State of H.P. & Ors. and connected cases, t Court has held that para teachers are entitled to all the emoluments as are paid to contract teachers, because as per the Government policy, they are to be treated similarly for all purposes. Therefore, t writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the eligible vacation salary, during the entire service period, to the petitioner in case the same has not been granted so far in view of the judgment of t Court in Baldev Singh versus State of H.P., 2009 (1) HLJ 29, on production of a copy of t judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition and copy of the judgments, referred to above. If the amounts are not disbursed as above, the petitioner will be entitled to interest @ 10% and the officers responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same. 2. The writ petition is disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice. December 27, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud), ms Judge