CWP(T) No. 14509/2008 27.08.2011 Present: Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R. M. Bisht, Dy. A. G. with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Dy. A.G for the respondents. Facts are not in dispute. Petitioner was appointed as a Junior Basic Teacher (JBT) w.e.f. 23.9.1988 on adhoc basis. His services were regularized on 15.3.1991. Petitioner had rendered his military service, which period, w.e.f. 22.8.1972, was also considered for the purposes of fixation of pay and seniority. 2. It is the petitioner’s grievance that persons junior to him were firstly promoted as Head Teachers w.e.f. 28.6.2002 and thereafter as Centre Head Teachers sometime in August 2005. In this regard, name of one Smt. Shakuntla Dhiman has been furnished by the petitioner in the petition. 3. In the reply even these facts have not been denied by the State. The only stand for not according benefit of promotion, from the date when such benefits were given to persons junior to the petitioner, is the pendency of the instant petition. This Court had not restrained the respondents from taking any steps in according benefits, in accordance with law and petitioner’s entitlement. 4. Be that as it may be, since factual position is not in dispute, a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s case for promotion, in accordance with law, from such date(s) when similar benefits were accorded to similarly situated persons, but junior to him. All consequential actions shall be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment. Monetary benefits, due and admissible, if any, shall also be disbursed within the aforesaid period, failing which, thereafter petitioner shall be entitled to interest @9% per annum, which shall be recovered from the concerned erring official(s). 5. It is also the petitioner’s grievance that benefit of grant of proficiency step-up has not been accorded to him. Respondents have accorded benefit to the petitioner only by counting his service from the date of his regular appointment, which was in the year 1991. Respondents have not taken into account the period of service rendered by the petitioner between the year 1988 upto 1991. In this regard, my attention has been invited to letters dated 6.4.1999 and 10.8.1999 issued by Department of Finance, Govt. of Himachal Pradesh, wherein it has been categorically decided that adhoc service rendered by an employee upto 31.3.1998 is to be counted for the purposes of grant of proficiency step-up. The aforesaid letters are taken on record. As such, respondents shall also consider the petitioner’s case for the same by taking into account the said letters. Needful shall also be done, as directed hereinabove, in accordance with law within the aforesaid period. 6. With the aforesaid observations, present petition stands disposed off. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. August 27, 2011 (rana)