Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:25008 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No.192 of 2025 Date of Decision:- 24.07.2025 Daulat Ram ....Appellant Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ....Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant : Mr. Ashwani Gupta, Mr. Abhendra Gupta and Ms. Babita Chauhan, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Gobind Korla, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1-State. : Mr. Tek Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral). The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 01.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.1070 of 2025 titled Daulat Ram Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., whereby the claim as such to count the daily wage service for a period of 4 years and 03 months for adding to the qualifying service was rejected for the grant of pension i.e. from February, 2009 to May, 2013. The said prayer as such was based on the judgment of the Apex Court in Sunder Singh Vs. State of H.P. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 and others in Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017 decided on 08.03.2018. 2. The learned Single Judge had noticed that since the regular service was only for a period of 9 years, 2 months, and 24 days i.e. from June 2013 upto his superannuation on 31.07.2022. The daily wage period was short and was not for a period of five years, as such, the benefit which could have been granted in terms of Sunder Singh case (supra). 3. Resultantly, paragraph 6 of Sunder Singh case (supra) has been referred to as how the addition is to be made to the regular service in order to grant the benefit for pension. The said para reads as under:- “Accordingly, we direct that w.e.f. 01.01.2018, the appellants or other similarly placed Class-IV employees will be entitled to pension if they have been duly regularized and have been completed total eligible service for more than 10 years. Daily wage service of 5 years will be treated equal to one year of regular service for pension. If on that basis, their services are more than 8 years but less than 10 years, their service will be reckoned as ten years.” 4. It is in such circumstances, the order impugned dated 03.10.2024 (Annexure P-2), had been challenged and since the authorities had rejected the same, after considering the judgment of the Sunder Singh case (supra) which was upheld while dismissing the writ petition of the petitioner-Daulat Ram working as Sweeper. 3 5. Counsel for the appellant has tried to further distinguish paragraph 6 that even 8 years of service as such would enable the employee for the grant of benefit of pension. We are not in a position to agree as the benefit as such which the Apex Court had granted provided a minimum period of five years of service of daily wage before the addition could be made to the regular service to qualify the same for the purpose of pension which has fallen short by 08 months as he is having only 04 years and 03 months of daily wage service as such. Thus he has been denied the relief in consonance with the law laid down by the Apex Court and keeping in view the Rule which provides 10 years of regular service for the grant of pension. 6. In such circumstances, no fault can be found in the order of the learned Single Judge. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed. 7. Pending miscellaneous application(s) if any, shall also stand disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Ranjan Sharma) Judge 24th July, 2025 (munish thakur)