IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15212 of 2024 Decided on: 8th January, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajinder Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to allow him to continue in service till his attaining the age of 60 years in light of law laid down in Satya Devi Versus State of H.P. and others2. 2. Noticing the contention of the petitioner, following order was passed in the matter on 13.12.2024:- “CWP No.15212/2024 & CMP No.24363/2024 Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. Petitioner’s, contention is that he has wrongfully been retired on 30.04.2024 at the age of 58 years, whereas, he is entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years i.e. 30.04.2026 in light of 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 CWP No.2274 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 28.05.2024 2 judgment dated 28.05.2024 rendered in CWP No. 2274 of 2021 (Satya Devi Vs. State of H.P. and others) and connected matters. Let learned Additional Advocate General to have instruction in the matter. List on 01.01.2025.” 3. Respondents in their instructions dated 07.01.2025 have not disputed that the case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid decision in Satya Devi’s2 case. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the respondents to confer the benefit of the aforesaid decision to the petitioner. The petitioner shall be re-inducted in service forthwith and shall be allowed to continue to serve till his attaining the age of 60 years. This shall, however, be subject to outcome of the SLP filed by the respondents in the aforesaid decision. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 08, 2025 Judge Mukesh