1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7091 of 2011 alongwith CWP No. 7169 of 2011. Decided on: 30th August, 2011. 1. CWP No. 7091 of 2011. Sudhakar Kimothi ..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & others ..Respondents 2. CWP No. 7169 of 2011. Veena Mittal & others ..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. & another ..Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner(s) : Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate in CWP No. 7091 of 2011. Mr. Anuj Gupta, Advocate in CWP No. 7169 of 2011. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General 2 Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petitions are filed mainly with the following prayers: CWP No. 7091 of 2011. “i) Writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant the benefit of pay fixation and counting of the service for the purpose of pension w.e.f. April, 1989 to 1.4.1994 in favour of the petitioner as has been allowed to similarly placed persons in the department of Education, Government of Himachal Pradesh along with consequential benefits.” CWP No. 7169 of 2011 “a)The respondents may kindly be summoned and may also be directed to submit the original records pertaining to the appointment and regularization of the petitioners. (b)That the respondents may kindly be directed to count the period of tenure service rendered by the petitioners w.e.f. 14-4-1987 to 1-4-1994, for the purpose of pensionary/retrial benefits and annual increments.” 2. The petitioners claim the benefit of increments during the tenure period of service rendered by them and also count the said period for the purpose of pension. According to the 3 petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgment of this Court dated 16.12.2010 rendered in CWP No. 4550 of 2010 titled as Ravi Kumar vs. State of H.P. & another and other connected matters. It is for the respondents to examine the matter. 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 thereon, within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition(s) and the copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner(s). 3. With these observations, the writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 30th August, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (hl/priti) Judge.