Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 454 (HP)

Satish Kumar v. State of H. P.

2014-04-24

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY, SANJAY KAROL

body2014
JUDGMENT Sanjay Karol, Judge (Oral) The entitlement of the petitioner to the vacation salary and revised pay-scale is in issue in the present writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is squarely covered by the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Baldev Singh and others versus State of H.P. and others in CWP No.415 of 2000, decided on 01.09.2008 and connected matters, as also LPA No. 105 of 2010, titled as State of H.P. and others versus Rakesh Chand and others along with connected matters, decided on 13th December, 2012. This Court, on 09.01.2012 had passed following directions in CWP No.11920 of 2011-C, titled Vijay Kumar Chandel versus State of H.P. and others, which reads as under:- “This issue pertaining to vacation salary to contract teachers is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court titled as Baldev Singh & others versus State of H.P. and others, CWP No. 415 of 2000, decided on 1st September, 2008 and the judgment has become final. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release eligible vacation salary, during the entire service period to the petitioner in case the same has not been granted so far, within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition and a copy of the judgment, referred to above, by the petitioner. If the amounts are not disbursed, as above, the petitioner will be entitled to interest @ 10% and the officer(s) responsible for the delay shall be personally liable for the same.” 3. As such, present petitioner being similarly situated, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to disburse the vacation salary for the undisputed period, if not already disbursed to the petitioner, as per his entitlement and also the revised pay-scale, if admissible. Needful be positively done within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the petitioner. 4. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.