IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. (T) No. 12189 of 2008. Decided on 23.02.2011. _____________________________________________________ Vinod Kumar. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of H.P. and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Sunil Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner was appointed on consolidated salary. Case of the petitioner, in a nut-shell, is that he is entitled to allowances at such rates, as are admissible to other employees of his category in the organization. This question has been gone into by a coordinate Bench in CWP(T) No. 14148 of 2008, titled Dalip Kumar Versus State of H.P. and Others vide judgment dated 24th August, 24, 2010. This judgment has been considered by another coordinate Bench in CWP(T) No. 15167 of 2008, dated 31.12.2010 2. Consequently, in view of the two judgments cited hereinabove, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to take all consequential actions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of judgment to be 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. supplied by the petitioner to the competent authority, failing which, the petitioner shall be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum. The petition stands disposed of. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge February 23, 2011. (bhupender)