IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16343 of 2024 Date of Decision: 09.07.2025 __________________________________________________________ Sh. Dila Ram …….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. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to allow him to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years in light of law laid down in CWP No.2274 of 2021, decided along with connected matters on 28.05.2024 titled as Satya Devi Vs. State of H.P. and Others. 2. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents does not dispute the fact that case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid decision in Satya Devi’s case, therefore, there shall be a direction to the respondents to confer the benefit of the aforesaid decision to the petitioner and allow him to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years. This, shall, however, be subject to outcome of the SLP filed by the respondents in the aforesaid decision. Interim order dated 30.12.2024 is hereby made absolute. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Since during proceedings of this case, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that in some of similar cases, decided earlier, petitioners who have completed 58 years of age, but not completed 60 years, but stand superannuated, are approaching the respondent-State seeking re-instatement on the strength of such orders, however, it was never the intent of this Court to order reinstatement of such, petitioners/employees. 4. Therefore, it is ordered that in all such cases, no petitioner/employee shall be reinstated in service, in case, he/she stands superannuated on the date of filing of the petition. Their service benefits shall abide by the decision which may be rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Inder Pal, (SLP(C) Diary No. 11306/2025, in which the judgment passed by this Court in Satya Devi’s case has been stayed on 24.3.2025. 5. A copy of this order be supplied to Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, for bringing this order to the notice of Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, for compliance. The present petition is disposed in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 09, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)