Hardyal Singh vs State Of H.P. & Ors

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Notice. Mr. Rupinder Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for the grant of following substantive relief: -

“That a writ in the nature mandamus may also be issued, directing the respondents to treat the retirement age of the petitioner as 60 years instead of 58 years as per notification dated 21.02.2018 (Annexure P-9) and his daily waged service of 8 years be treated as 1 year and 7 months as regular service and thus, the total qualifying service be reckoned as 10 years and 6 months for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits in light of the judgment of Full Bench of this Hon’ble High Court passed in CWP No.2711 of 2017 titled as Baldev Vs. State of HP & Others decided on 22.02.2022 with all consequential service benefits and justice be done.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the relief prayed for by the petitioner is covered by the judgments rendered in Baldev Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. , Latest HLJ 2022 (HP) (1)151, Rakesh Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., passed in CWP No.2735/2010, decided on 28.07.2010 and Sunder Singh Vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh & ors. passed in Civil Appeal No.6309/2017, decided on 08.10.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner would be content if the case of the petitioner is considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgment. Learned Deputy Advocate General has no objection to this prayer.

Having regard to above submissions and without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed of by directing the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall also be communicated to the petitioner.