JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. 1. This judgment shall dispose of both the writ petitions involving similar questions of law and facts. 2. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the written instructions, which reveal that the point in issue in these writ petitions is covered by the judgment, Annexure P-6 to one of the writ petitions i.e. CWP No. 426 of 2018, of this Court rendered in CWP No.1364 of 2015, titled Poonam Kumari versus State of H.P. & another. Similar issue brought to this Court in CWP No.2309 of 2016, titled Saroj Devi versus State of H.P. & another and CWP 2310 of 2016, titled Pushpender Thakur versus State of H.P. & another, was also decided in favour of the petitioners therein vide judgment dated 4th May, 2017, Annexure P-6 (Colly.). 3. Learned Additional Advocate General while answering another query in the previous order as to why the benefits under the judgment have not been given to the petitioners, has expressed his inability today to assist this Court. We drop such query with the expectation that learned Additional Advocate General shall discuss the matter with the competent authority in the State Government at an appropriate level to ensure that the government servants, whose grievances are otherwise covered by the law already laid, not forced to rush to the Court for redressal thereof. The writ petitions, however, are disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to extend all admissible benefits to the petitioners, while applying the ratio of the judgments Annexure P-6 (Colly.) within two months from today. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.