IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15912 of 2025 Decided on: 10th October, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brij Lal …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Rajesh Kashyap, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Rajesh Kashyap, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and respondent No.3, respectively. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner’s case is that he had rendered 11 years of daily wage service and 09 years & 02 months 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 regular service before his superannuation on 28.02.2011. According to the petitioner, he is entitled for pension in light of law laid down in Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2, Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others3 and Mathu Ram Versus Municipal Corporation and others4. His grievance is that his representation dated 18.07.2023 (Annexure P-3) seeking applicability of above decisions has not been decided till date by the respondents/competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case respondent No.2/ competent authority is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2/ competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 18.07.2023 (Annexure P-3) in accordance with law as well as taking 2 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 3 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 4 CWP No.2415 of 2012, decided on 31.7.2014 3 into consideration the above judgments in the cases of Sunder Singh2, Balo Devi3 and Mathu Ram4 within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 10, 2025 Judge Mukesh