IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. 3826 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 4th March, 2010. Gurmail Singh Petitioner through Mr. S.K.Rattan, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Anr. Respondents through Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) In this Civil Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to count the ad-hoc service rendered by him w.e.f. 17.03.1967 to 12.06.1970 for the purposes of grant of additional increments/increments in the running scale on completion of 8 and 18 years of service and consequently to re-fix his pay and pension and also to grant the arrears of 'pay' and 'retiral benefits'. The petitioner joined the Education Department as a JBT teacher on ad-hoc basis w.e.f. 17.03.1967 and he continued to work as such till 12.03.1970 when his services were regularized in terms of a government policy. The petitioner retired from service as a Central Head Teacher w.e.f. 31.3.2003. After his retirement, the petitioner approached this Court in CWP No. 17386 of 2005 for counting of his aforementioned ad- hoc service towards 'qualifying service' for the purposes of pay and other retiral benefits. The respondents acceded to the petitioner's claim and consequently the writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 14.09.2006 [Annexure P-1] in terms of the statement made on behalf of the respondents to the effect that the ad-hoc service of the petitioner shall be counted towards the 'qualifying service' for determining the 'retiral benefits'. The petitioner through this second petition now seeks a direction that his adhoc service should also be counted towards the grant of additional increments/increments on completion of 8 and 18 years of service. Without referring to the Rules or policy, in terms whereof the petitioner can claim additional increments on completion of 8 and 18 years of service, the entire writ petition is founded upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No. 7862 of 2006 [Hanumant Singh & Ors. V State of Haryana & Ors.], a copy of which has been appended as Annexure P-2. In Hanumant Singh's case [supra], the Division Bench held that ad-hoc service followed by regular service shall not be counted for the purposes of grant of higher pay scale/benefit of assured career promotion scheme on completion of 8/18 years of service. The Division Bench, however, further held that such adhoc service followed by the regular service shall be counted for the purposes of grant of additional increment in the running scale on completion of 10/20 or 8/18 years of service. As noticed above, the petitioner has neither pleaded the relevant facts nor has referred to the instructions/policy, which may entitle him the relief noticed above nor he has explained as to why the afore-stated relief was not claimed by him earlier in CWP No. 17386 of 2005, decided on 14.09.2006. In the absence of any factual foundation, in my considered view, the desired relief can not be granted. Dismissed. March 04, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE