IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPs No. 2181 and 2183 of 2011. Decided on: 21st April, 2011. 1. CWP No.2181 of 2011. Anil Kumari. vs. State of H.P. & another. 2. CWP No. 2183 of 2011. Satya Dev Sharma. Vs. State of H.P. & another. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner : Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners claim the benefit of ad hoc service followed by regular service for the purpose of pension and increments. According to the petitioners, the issue is covered in their favour by the judgments of this Court rendered in LPA No.36 of 2010, Sita Ram vs. State and Ravi Kumar vs. State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 4550 of 2010.. 2. Learned Deputy Advocate General points out that the factual aspects are to be verified by the competent authority. Petitioners submit that they would file appropriate representation(s) furnishing all factual details before the competent authority within a period of one month from today. It is always open for them to do so. 3. Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the respondent concerned to examine the matter, after verifying the facts, in the light of the judgments referred to 2 above and take appropriate action thereon within a period of four months from the date of the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and the copies of the judgments referred to above. 4. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 21st April, 2011. (Justice V.K. Ahuja), (tr) Judge.