[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Himachal Pradesh High Court
_____________________________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 30 December, 2025
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.19985 of 2025
.
Date of Decision: 30.12.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Devinder Kumar
.........Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
.......Respondents
of
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?
rt
For the Petitioner: Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr.
Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and
Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)
Petitioner herein, who has retired as class-IV employee, is
aggrieved of order dated 8.10.2025 (Annexure P-8), whereby his
representation dated 15.12.2023 filed in terms of judgment dated
7.7.2025 passed by this Court in CWP No. 10676 of 2025 titled
Devinder Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., came to be
rejected on the ground that department of Jal Shakti Vibhag, is
contemplating to file curative petition in the Hon'ble Apex Court
against the judgment passed by it in Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022,
decided on 18.7.2022, titled as Balo Devi and Ors. v. State of
Himachal Pradesh and Ors.
2. Having regard to the nature of controversy coupled with
.
the fact that facts otherwise pleaded on record by the petitioner stand
admitted in the impugned order dated 8.10.2025, this Court sees no
necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are
otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate
General.
of
3. Petitioner herein was engaged as part time worker in the
year 1999 in the Agricultural Department and his services were
rt
converted as daily wager w.e.f. 1.4.2009 as per judgment passed by
this Court in CWP(T) No. 12548 of 2008 dated 26.2.2011. After his
being converted from part time to daily wager, petitioner served the
respondent department on daily wage basis with 240 days in each
calendar year w.e.f. 1.4.2009 to 31.3.2016. His services were
regularized in terms of policy of regularization framed by the
Government of Himachal Pradesh on 22.4.2016 vide office order dated
30.6.2016. After the regularization, petitioner served the department
till 30.11.2024, on which date, he was superannuated i.e. for 8 years,
4 months and 29 days.
4. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been
highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel
for the petitioner is that prior to filing of the petition at hand, he had
approached this court by way of CWP No. 10676 of 2025, seeking
therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his case in
light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Balo Devi's
.
case, wherein it specifically came to be ruled that weightage of
additional one year shall be given to daily wage employee for his
having worked on daily wage basis for five years and in case, after
adding afore one year in regular service, total regular service comes
out to be more than eight years, same shall be reckoned as 10 years.
of
This Court having taken note of the genuine prayer of the petitioner
directed the respondents vide judgment dated 7.7.2025 to consider
rt
and decide case of the petitioner in light of Balo Devi's case. Though
respondents vide order dated 8.10.2025, passed order on the
representation of the petitioner, but rejected the same on altogether
unsustainable grounds. No cogent and convincing reasoning has been
assigned in the impugned order for not according the benefit of Balo
Devi's case in favour of the petitioner, rather his representation has
been rejected on the ground that department is contemplating to file
curative petition in the Hon'ble Apex Court in Balo Devi's case.
5. Since it is not in dispute that judgment rendered in Balo
Devi's case has been implemented in hundreds of cases, there is no
occasion, if any, for the respondents to reject the claim of the
petitioner. Once it is not in dispute that before regularization,
petitioner had rendered daily wage service of 7 years and 3 months, he
ought to have been given weightage of one year in lieu of the daily
wage services. After adding one year in lieu of daily wage service,
regular service of the petitioner would be 9 years, 4 months and 29
.
days. In Balo Devi's case, Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held
that if after adding one year of weightage, if any, given in lieu of daily
wage service, total regular service comes out to be more than 8 years,
same shall be reckoned as 10 years.
6. In the instant case, petitioner has rendered regular service
of
of 8 years, 4 months and 29 days and in case, he is given weightage of
one year qua his having rendered for 7 years and 3 months daily wage
rt
service, his total service would be 9 years, 4 months and 29 days and
in that situation, same is required to be reckoned as 10 years. Since
on the basis of aforesaid analogy, total service of the petitioner comes
out to be more than eight years, he is entitled to pension as has been
prayed for.
7. Needless to say, till the time judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Balo Devi's case is modified or varied,
respondents are under obligation to implement the same in its letter
and spirit, but certainly, genuine claim of the petitioner could not have
been rejected on the ground that department is contemplating to file
curative petition.
8. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is
allowed and impugned order dated 8.10.2025 (Annexure P-8) is
quashed and set-aside and respondents are directed to extend the
benefit of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Balo Devi's
case to the petitioner and thereafter, forward his case to the office of
.
Accountant General for issuance of Pension Payment Order,
expeditiously, preferably, within two months.
9. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of
alongwith pending applications, if any.
of
December 30, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
rt
