IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWPOA No. 7899 of 2019 Date of decision : 19.9.2025. Kanshi Ram ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Ms. Deep Mala Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Addl. A.G. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): CMP-T No. 511 of 2025 Allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall be satisfied at this stage in case the competent authority i.e. respondent No.3 is issued time bound directions to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4792 of 2022, arising out of SLP (C) No. 18830 of 2021, titled as, Balo Devi vs. State of H.P. and others, on 18.7.2022. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- 3. The facts as emerge from the pleadings of the parties prima-facie reveal that though the petitioner has rendered regular service with the respondent department but the said service has fallen short of the qualifying service required under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 to make the petitioner eligible for pension under the said rules. 4. The prayer as made by the petitioner being innocuous is allowed. 5. Without adverting to the merits of the case, respondent No.3 is directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Balo Devi (supra), within six weeks from today by passing a detailed and reasoned order. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 19th September Judge (kck)