Kanta Devi vs State Of H.P. & Ors

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Notice. Mr. R.S. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking following relief:-

“(I) That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of the husband of the petitioner for retirement on attaining the age of 60 years instead of 58 years with all consequential benefits.

(II) That the work charge period may kindly be counted towards pension and pensionary benefits in terms of the judgment passed in Sukru Ram’s case.

(III) That the respondents may kindly be directed to grant the benefit of judgment passed by the Honb’ble Apex Court in Balo Devi’s c and Sunder Singh’s case.”

The case of the petitioner is that Sh. Ram Krishan, late husband of the petitioner was accorded work charge status w.e.f. 01.01.2000. The respondents superannuated him at the age of 58 years on 31.07.2007, whereas he was required to be superannuated at the age of 60 years i.e. on 31.03.2009.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s husband ought to have been retired on 31. 03.2009 in view of the law laid down in Baldev Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., Latest HLJ 2022 (HP) (1)151. Further submission is that by applying the law laid down in Civil Appeal No. 6309 of 2017 (Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors), decided on 8th March, 2018 and Civil Appeal No. 4792 of 2022 (Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others), decided on 18.07.2022, the petitioner would be entitled to the pension on account of her husband having rendered qualifying service.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content if the case of the late husband of the petitioner is considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgments. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection for the same.

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

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of.