IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7234 of 2024 Decided on: 28th March, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Savitri Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. The writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “i. That the retirement of the petitioner at the age of 58 years, may kindly be set aside and she may be held to be in service upto the age of 60 years with all consequential benefits as directed in the case of Baldev Vrs. State of H.P. and others. ii. That the respondents may kindly be directed to count the entire services rendered by the petitioner prior to her regularization on part time and whole time contingent basis w.e.f. 26.07.2007 to 07.08.2008 for grant pension to the petitioner from the due date, with all benefits incidental thereof.” 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be confining her prayer only for grant of pension, i.e. prayer No.(i). Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider the facts of the case vis-à-vis the legal position settled in Baldev Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others2. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner for redressal of the above grievance in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Baldev2 by passing an appropriate order, 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 March 28, 2025 Judge Mukesh 2 CWP No.2711 of 2017, decided alongwith connected matter on 22.02.2022