Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.

Appellants-writ respondents, by the medium of this Letters Patent Appeal, have questioned the judgment and order, dated 30.08.2011, made by the Writ Court/learned Single Judge in CWP No. 124 of 2011, titled as Abhinav Soni and others versus State of H.P. and others, whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners-respondents herein came to be allowed and the writ petitioners-respondents herein were held entitled to Non Practicing Allowance (for short "NPA") with effect from 01.01.2011, i.e. date of presentation of the writ petition (for short "the impugned judgment").

2. Selection process was drawn by the writ respondents-appellants herein for appointment of Veterinary Officers on contract basis in terms of the advertisement notices. Writ petitioners-respondents herein participated, were selected, came to be appointed on contract basis and their remuneration was fixed at Rs. 8,000/- per month.

3. The grievance projected by the writ petitioners-respondents herein in the writ petition is that they are entitled to grant of NPA in view of the fact that they have been banned from private practice, thus, are entitled to NPA, which was not granted to the