Himachal Pradesh High Court
Bimla Devi vs State Of H.P. & Others on 1 October, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 11160 of 2024
Date of Decision: 01.10.2024
Bimla Devi .....Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. & others .....Respondents.
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. B.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate
General.
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral)
Notice. Mr. B.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General,
appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:
" (i) that Annexure P-1 may kindly be quashed and
set-aside and the respondents may kindly be
directed to allowed the petitioner to continue upto
the age of 60 years, as per the judgment rendered
by this Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 2274 of 2021,
Satya Devi vs. State of H.P. & others and the
connected matters."
3. The petitioner was engaged on part-time basis as Water
Carrier on 10.06.2005 and her services were brought on daily
wage establishment on 20.08.2015. Subsequent thereto, service
of the petitioner was regularized in the Health and Family Welfare
Department on 07.03.2020. Admittedly, in the case at hand, the
petitioner is a Class-IV employee. She stood retired on
29.04.2023, vide Annexure P-1 on attaining the age of 58 years.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
4. The State vide Notification dated 21.02.2018 had made a
distinction between Class-IV employees engaged prior to
10.05.2001 and those engaged after 10.05.2001 for the purpose
of determining the age of their retirement. Those Class IV
employees engaged prior to 10.05.2001 were retired after
attaining the age of 60 years and those Class IV employees
engaged after 10.05.2001 were retired after attaining the age of 58
years. The aforesaid notification come up for consideration before
this Court in CWP No. 2274 of 2021 alongwith connected
matters, titled Satya Devi vs. State of H.P. & others alongwith
connected matters, decided on 28.05.2024. Therein the
Notification dated 21.02.2018 was quashed. It was further ordered
that all Class-IV employees (government servants) irrespective of
their dates of appointment would now retire after attaining the age
of 60 years. The relevant extract of the aforesaid judgment is
being reproduced here-in-below:
"118. Therefore, for all the aforesaid reasons we
strike down the words "appointed on part
time/daily wage basis prior to 10.5.2001 and
regularized on or after 10.5.2001" in the
notification dt. 21.02.2018 and declare that all
class-IV Government servants irrespective of their
initial date of engagement or the date of their
regularization would retire on the last day of the
month in which they attain the age of their
superannuation of 60 years.
119. All the Writ Petitions are allowed to the
extent indicated above. Such of the petitioners/
Class IV Government servants who had retired
from service prior to attaining age of
superannuation of 60 years, shall be reinstated by
the respondents if they have not crossed the age
of 60 years as on date. Others who will not be
able to be reinstated now on ground that they
have already attained the age of 60 years, shall
be paid compensation equal to the total
emoluments which they would have received had
they been in service until they attained the age of
60 years, less any amount they might have
received by way of pension., etc. They will also be
entitled to consequential retiral benefits. These
shall be paid within 3 months from today. Those
who are continuing in service by virtue of interim
orders passed by this Court shall continue in
service till they attain the age of 60 years. No
costs."
5. It is stated by the learned counsel on both sides that the
issue involved in this petition is covered by the judgment delivered
on 28.05.2024 in CWP no. 2274 of 2021 (Satya Devi vs. State of
H.P and others) and batch of cases.
6. In view of above terms, the present petition is allowed and
order dated 29.04.2023 (annexure P-1) is quashed. The
respondents are directed to continue the petitioner in service till
she attains the age of 60 years.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also
stand disposed of.
(Bipin Chander Negi)
Judge
October 1 , 2024
(Nisha)
