Himachal Pradesh High Court
____________________________________________________ vs State Of H.P. & Others on 23 September, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CWP No. 10610 of 2024
Decided on: 23.09.2024
____________________________________________________
Kanto 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. Sat Prakash, Advocate.
For the respondents :
Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional
Advocate General. :
____________________________________________________
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral)
Notice. Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, learned Additional Advocate
General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the
respondents.
The instant petition has been filed for the grant of
following substantive reliefs:-
"I To reengage the petitioner as Class-IV (Peon) in
GSSS Aura, Tehsil Bharmour, District Chamba, H.P.
from where the petitioner has prematurely been
retired w.e.f. 31.07.2023 at the age of 58 years instead
of 60 years.
(ii) That to grant all consequential benefits to the
petitioner for the period w.e.f. 31.07.2023 till the date
of reengagement in the interest of justice and fair
play."
2. Petitioner was appointed as a Part Time Water Carrier on
17.08.2002. Thereafter, the services of the petitioner were regularized
on 25.09.2017. Admittedly, the petitioner in the case at hand is a Class
Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
IV (Peon) employee. On attaining the age of 58 years, the petitioner
has been retired on 31st July, 2023 vide impugned Annexure P-2.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
.
the documents appended alongwith the present petition.
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 along with
connected matters, titled Satya Devi vs. State of H.P. & others along
with 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
6.
r to
28.05.2024 in CWP No. 2274 of 2021 titled Satya Devi vs. State of
H.P and others and batch of cases.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed in terms of the
aforesaid judgment and Annexure P-2 dated 31.07.2023 is quashed.
The respondents are directed to continue the petitioner in service till
she attains the age of 60 years.
In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed
of.
(Bipin Chander Negi)
Judge
September 23, 2024
tarun
