IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.20886 of 2025 Decided on: 01.01.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gian Chand …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner seeks applicability of Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 2 and others3 to enable him to earn pension. It is his case that he is in possession of service that is required in terms of law laid down in Sunder Singh2 as clarified in Balo Devi3 for the purpose of pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner had represented in past several times to respondents No. 3 and 4 for grant of pension in view of Sunder Singh2 & Balo Devi3 , but the respondents have not yet considered his representations in terms of aforesaid decisions. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in he is permitted to file a comprehensive representation to the respondent No.3/ Competent Authority for redressal of his grievances and the respondents/Competent Authority is directed to decide the same within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed by permitting the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation within two weeks, which shall be decided by respondent No.3 /Competent Authority within six weeks 3 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 3 from the date of receipt of the same, in accordance with law and also keeping in view the aforesaid judgments. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 1, 2026 Judge R.Atal