IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.5598 of 2024 Decided on: 4th April, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Salma Begum ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Tanuj Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge The case set up by the petitioner is that:- (i). Petitioner’s husband Sh. Mohammad Iqwal was appointed as Pump Operator (Class-III employee) on daily wage basis with the respondent-Department on 01.01.1982. (ii). His services were regularized as Pump Operator on 01.01.1994 on completion of 12 years of continuous service. (iii). He superannuated from service as Pump Operator (Class-III employee) on 31.03.2002. He was not granted 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - pension and pensionary benefits as did not have to his credit requisite qualifying service in terms of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules. Petitioner’s husband died on 08.07.2014. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon Roop Lal Versus State of H.P. & Others2, whereby benefit of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.3 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others4 was ordered to be extended to Class-III employees as well. Relevant portion from the aforesaid decision reads as under:- “22. In view of the above discussion, respondent- State is directed to extend benefit of Daily Wage service to the petitioner, in terms of Sunder Singh's case, as explained in Balo Devi's case, for calculating qualifying service for the purpose of pension, and to extend all benefits of pension to the petitioner within one month from today. However, the petitioner shall be entitled for monetary benefits three years prior to the date of filing of the petition. Benefits accruing beyond three years prior to filling of the petition, if any, shall be only on notional basis. 22-A. With respect to the cut-off date from which actual monetary benefits are to be extended, keeping in view the law laid down by Supreme Court in Sunder Singh’s and Balo Devi’s cases, it is further clarified that the petitioner shall be entitled for actual monetary benefits w.e.f. 1.1.2018 and the monetary 2 LPA No.196 of 2022, decided on 11.10.2023 3 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 4 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 - 3 - benefits, if any, prior to 1.1.2018 shall only be on notional basis, but if the three years period, prior to filing of the petition, is subsequent to 1.1.2018, then the actual benefits shall be granted from such subsequent date.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that SLP(C) No.1007/2024 preferred by the State against the aforesaid decision has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 18.03.2025. 3. In view of the aforesaid decision in Roop Lal’s2 case and dismissal of respondents’ appeal against this decision, without examining the merits of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner for grant of pension and pensionary benefits to her in accordance with law as well as in light of the aforesaid decision, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge April 4, 2025 R.Atal