1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 11494 of 2011-J Decided on: 28.12.2011 Sajida Begam, D/o Sh. Abdul Shakur, R/o Village Kanshipur, P.O. Nihal Garh, Distt. Sirmour, H.P. .....Petitioner Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. 2. Director Higher Education, H.P., Shimla. 3. The Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Ajoli, P.O. Nihal Garh, Distt. Sirmour, H.P. .....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, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) This writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayer: “(A) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order, direction directing the respondents to pay to the petitioner the benefit of merger of 50% of D.A. 2 into basic pay + 11% D.A. w.e.f. 01-04-2004 in the revised pay scale and further revision thereof from time to time till the regularization of their services on their respective dates, with all consequential benefits and arrears accrued on this count with interest as per the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in CWP (T) no. 14232/2008 titled as Nek Ram & others V/s State of H.P. and others, dated 17-11-2009.” 2. As far as the issue of merger of 50% D.A. is concerned, the same is covered in favour of the petitioner by the decision of this Court in CWP (T) No. 14232 of 2008, titled Nek Ram and others versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. The needful, in the light of the above decision, shall be done in the case of the petitioner and the benefits, if any, to which the petitioner is found eligible, shall be disbursed to her, within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition by the petitioner before the second respondent. 3. As far as the entitlement of the petitioner for revised pay scale is concerned, the parties shall be governed by the decision of this Court in LPA No. 105 of 2010, subject to its finality. 3 4. The writ petition is disposed of, as above, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 28, 2011 (Justice Dev Darshan Sud), (ms/hl) Judge.