AMAR NATH Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, by means of this petition, have prayed for grant of a number of reliefs including seniority. However, during the pendency of the petition, all the petitioners have retired and one of them, petitioner No. 1, has expired.

(2.) Mr. Paul fairly submits that now, the only claim which survives is that the ad hoc service rendered by the petitioners from the date of appointment in the year 1967 till the regularization in the year 1970 be taken into consideration for purposes of working out their pension and other retiral benefits.

(3.) This Court in CWP (T) No. 5442 of 2008, titled Ram Chand & others versus State of H.P. & another held as under: the sole question which arises for