Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17133 (HP)

PRITAM SINGH v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/9741/2025 · 2025-09-09

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9741 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.09.2025 __________________________________________________________ Sh. Pritam Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Babita Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: “i. That the pay of the petitioner may be ordered to be fixed from the date from which he has been granted work charge status with all consequential benefits and the respondents may also be ordered to grant pension to the petitioner, as per the old pension rules, since the petitioner would be deemed to be appointed prior to 15th May, 2003, when the old pension was bound up, from the date the petitioner was retired from service.” 2. Careful perusal of office order dated 29.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) suggests that petitioner has already been granted work charge status w.e.f. 01.01.2003 on account of his having completed eight years of service on daily wage basis with 240 days in each calendar year and now only pay needs to be refixed. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- 3. Learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that order of pay fixation, if not already passed, shall be passed expeditiously. 4. In view of the above, present petition is disposed of, with the direction to respondents to ensure that order of pay fixation shall be passed expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four weeks. The present petition is disposed in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge September 09, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)