1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 11471 of 2025 Date of decision: 7 th October,2025 Rakesh Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of Hp and others. …Respondents. Corum Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner. Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral) The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:- “(i) That a writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued for quashing the impugned notified dated 21.2.2018 to the extent whereby incorporates by way of amendment in rule 56 of the fundamental rules after the second proviso to clause (e) “Provided that a Class IV Government servant appointed on part-time/daily wages basis prior to 10.05.2001”. Or in the alternative the aforementioned part of the amendment may very kindly be ordered to be read down as unconstitutional ad violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. (ii) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued for directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to perform his duties in respondent organization upto the age of 60 years i.e. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes 2 upto 31.12.2024, in view of judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court in case of CWP No. 2274 of 2021 titled as Satya Devi vs. State of HP along with connected matters decided on 28.05.2024, in the interest of justice.” 2. As admitted by parties, claim of petitioner is squarely covered by judgment dated 28.5.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this High Court in CWP No. 2274 of 2021 titled Satya Devi vs. State of HP. The said judgment has been assailed by the respondent/State by filing SLP(C ) No. 20496 of 2024, which is pending adjudication before the Apex Court. 3 Parties have agreed for deciding this petition with direction that parties shall abide by the final outcome of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in aforesaid SLP and petitioner shall be entitled or dis- entitled for the claim set up in present petition in consonance with judgment passed by the Supreme Court and benefit, if any, available to him shall be governed by said judgment. In view of above, present petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms along with pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge. (Romesh Verma), Judge. 7th October, 2025 (MS)