2024:HHC:3794 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10881 of 2023 Decided on: 06.01.2025 Pradeep Thakur and others … Petitioners Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ___________________________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. S.C. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rajeev Sharma and Arvind Negi, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy AG. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Though, the reply to the petition has not been filed, however, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the relief being prayed for by the petitioners is squarely covered by the judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWPOA No. 195 of 2019, titled as Sheela Devi and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 28.12.2019, as affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No. 10399 of 2020, titled as the State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Sheela Devi and others as well as judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2411 of 2019, titled as Jagdish Chand vs. State of H.P. and others and other connected 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2024:HHC:3794 matters, decided on 10.01.2020. 2. The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Lecturers, on contract basis, in the year 1997 and thereafter, their services were regularized in the year 2006. The relief which they are seeking is that in the light of law declared by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWPOA No. 195 of 2019, titled as Sheela Devi and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on 28.12.2019, as affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No. 10399 of 2020, titled as the State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Sheela Devi and others as well as the judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2411 of 2019, titled as Jagdish Chand vs. State of H.P. and others and other connected matters, decided on 10.01.2020, services rendered by them on contract basis are required to be ordered to be counted towards qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits as well as annual increments. 3. Though, the prayer of the petitioners is opposed by learned Deputy Advocate General, however, he could not deny the fact that the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWPOA No. 195 of 2019, titled as Sheela Devi and others vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, has been pleased to direct that contract service followed by regularization has to be counted for the purpose of pensionary benefits which judgment has been upheld by Hon’ble 3 2024:HHC:3794 Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No. 10399 of 2020, titled as the State of Himachal Pradesh and others vs. Sheela Devi and others, wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has been pleased to hold that contract service is liable to be counted but only for the purpose of pensionary benefits. Learned Deputy Advocate General also could not deny that Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 2411 of 2019, titled as Jagdish Chand vs. State of H.P. and others and other connected matters, decided on 10.01.2020, has been pleased to hold that contractual services rendered by the petitioners therein shall be counted towards qualifying service for the purpose of pension under CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 as well as for annual increments. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with direction that the services rendered by the petitioners on contract basis, followed by regularization, be taken into consideration for determining the pensionary benefits as well as for annual increments. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. Interim order stands vacated. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge January 06, 2025 (narender)