IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 4800 of 2010 along with the writ petitions mentioned below. Decided on: 13th August, 2010. (For title, please see below.) Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. Advocate General, for respondents. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) 1. CWP No.4800 of 2010. Ravi Parkash. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. CWP No.4801 of 2010. Ashok Kumar. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 2. CWP No.4802 of 2010. Shalini. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 3. CWP No.4803 of 2010. Sartaj Singh. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 4. CWP No.4804 of 2010. Manoj Kumar. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 5. CWP No.4805 of 2010. Kushal Chand. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 6. CWP No.4806 of 2010. Jeewan Singh. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 7. CWP No.4807 of 2010. Raj Kumar. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 8. CWP No.4808 of 2010. Sumit. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 2 9. CWP No.4809 of 2010. Sachin Kumar. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 10. CWP No.4810 of 2010. Anju Kumari. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 11. CWP No.4811 of 2010. Sheela Kumari. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 12. CWP No.4812 of 2010. Pawan Kumar. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 13. CWP No.4813 of 2010. Inder Singh. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 14. CWP No.4814 of 2010. Promila Thakur. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 15. CWP No.4815 of 2010. Sunita Sharma. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 16. CWP No.4816 of 2010. Dr. Anjali. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 17. CWP No.4817 of 2010. Parvesh Sharma. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 18. CWP No.4818 of 2010. Rajinder Singh. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 19. CWP No.4819 of 2010. Balam Negi. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 20. CWP No.4820 of 2010. Sapna Verma. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. 21. CWP No.4821 of 2010. Mashu Ram. Vs. State of H.P. & ors. The petitioners in these writ petitions are aggrieved since they are not able to reap the fruits of orders passed by this Court regarding the vacation salary. It appears that the Government had initially decided to grant the benefit but it is seen that the same has been withdrawn as per Annexure P-3 on the ground that the State has decided to take up the matter to the Supreme Court. We are informed that the 3 State has already filed SLP against the order dated 1.9.2008, passed in CWP No.144 of 2000. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the SLP has not even been registered before the Apex Court and the petitioners seek the benefit of order dated 1.9.2008, which the State initially had decided to implement. Apparently, the non-implementation is only on account of their decision to move the Supreme Court. It is also submitted that since the SLP has not even been admitted and since there is no interim order, there is no justification in not granting the benefit to the petitioners at least making it subject to the outcome of the matter now pending before the Supreme Court. It is further submitted that the petitioners are undertaking that they will refund the amount in case the Supreme Court takes a decision in favour of the State. 3. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Senior Additional Advocate General and having regard to the factual position, we are of the view that the dispute in these cases can be given quietus in case the petitioners give undertaking that in the event of the Supreme Court deciding in favour of the State, the money so received will be remitted back with 10% interest. Therefore, in the event of the petitioners giving undertaking that they would refund the amount received by way of vacation salary with 10% interest in the event of the State winning before the Supreme Court, they shall be disbursed the vacation salary within a month of the 4 execution of the undertaking. Needless to say that Annexure P-3 shall not stand in the way of disbursing the salary, as above. 4. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 13th August, 2010 ( Justice Rajiv Sharma), (tr) Judge.