1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 11744 of 2011-E Decided on: 29.12.2011 1. Smt. Anjana, W/o Sh. Pyar Chand, R/o Village Pantehar, P.O. Golwan, Tehsil Chauntra, Distt. Mandi, H.P. serving as Para Teacher (Physical Education Teacher) in Govt. Middle School Chauntra, Distt. Mandi, H.P. 2. Shri Nischal Rathore, serving as Para Teacher (Physical Education Teacher) in Govt. Senior Secondary School Pandol, Distt. Mandi, H.P. 3. Kumari Upasna, D/o Shri Jagannath, R/o Village Garondu, Tehsil Jogindernagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. serving as lecturer Commerce, Government Senior Secondary School Chauntra, Distt. Mandi. H.P. ....Petitioners Versus 1. State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary Education, Government of H.P. Shimla. 2. Director of Higher Education, Shimla, H.P. 3. Director of Elementary Education, Shimla, H.P. 4. Deputy Director of Higher Education Mandi, Distt. Mandi, H.P. 5. Principal, Government Senior Secondary School Chauntra, Tehsil Joginder Nagar, Distt. Mandi. H.P. 6. Principal, Govt. Senior Secondary School Pandol, Tehsil Joghinder Nagar, Distt. Mandi, H.P. ....Respondents Civil Writ Petitions 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. 2 For the petitioners : Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General, Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The petitioners are para teachers. They are aggrieved since they are not paid the vacation salary and other benefits as are paid to the contract teachers. In the judgment dated 21.10.2010, in CWP No. 2880 of 2010 titled as Dhananjay Saini versus State of H.P. & ors., and connected cases, this Court has held that para teachers are entitled to all the emoluments as are paid to contract teachers, because as per the Government policy, they are to be treated similarly for all purposes. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the eligible vacation salary, during the entire service period to the petitioners, in case the same has not been granted so far, in view of the judgment of this Court in Baldev Singh & others versus State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 415 of 2000, decided on 1st September, 2008, on production of a copy of this judgment alongwith a copy of the writ petition and a copy of the judgment, referred to above. If the amounts are not disbursed, as above, the petitioners will be entitled to 3 interest @ 10% and the officer responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same. 2. The writ petition is disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. December 29, 2011 (Justice Dev Dasrshan Sud), ( ms/hl) Judge.