2025:HHC:39612 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWPOA No.4503 of 2020 Decided on : 21.11.2025 __________________________________________________________ Yashpal Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista and Mr. Shivom Vashista, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Hemant K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. Ranjan Sharma, Judge Petitioner, Yashpal Singh, initially filed Original Application No.2915 of 2018 before State Administrative Tribunal and after abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court as CWPOA No.4503 of 2020, wherein, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:- “7(i) That the services rendered by the applicant on daily-wages basis w.e.f. 2.12.1999 to 24.1.2009 may very kindly be ordered to be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and he may be deemed to be in Govt. service prior to 1.1.2004 in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in CWP No.2371/2010 titled as ‘Harbans Lal Vs State of Punjab & others, decided on 31.8.2010 and further upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Review Petition (C) No.2038/2013 in Special Leave Petition 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:39612 (Civil) No.23578/2012 titled as ‘State of Punjab & Others Vs Harbans Lal’, in the interest of justice; 7(ii) That the Respondents may kindly be directed to consider the applicant entitled to contribute to G.P.F.” 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that he was engaged as daily wager Beldar on 02.12.1999 in National Highway Division, Rampur, District Shimla, and he rendered continuous service with 240 days till 23.01.2009. After regularization, the petitioner continued in the Respondent-Department and while in service, he was appointed/promoted as Clerk on 19.09.2014 under Limited Direct Recruitment in Fisheries Department. 3. In the above backdrop, the claim of petitioner is for counting daily wage service and to extend proportionate weightage for such daily wage service and regular service towards pensionary benefits. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that though he has set up a case based on the case of Harbans Lal Versus The State of Punjab and others [CWP No.2371 of 2010], decided on 31.08.2010, in the light of subsequent judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, In Re; Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh 3 2025:HHC:39612 alongwith connected matters, decided on 08.03.2018 and Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, In Re; Balo Devi Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., decided on 18.07.2022 and the petitioner is entitled for proportionate weightage for daily wage service, by treating 5 years daily wage service as one year regular service which is to be added towards regular service for pensionary benefits. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, on his Instructions, states that the petitioner shall be satisfied in case the petitioner is permitted to make a Fresh Representation ventilating his grievances within a reasonable time, with directions to the State Authorities to examine the claim of the petitioner in the light of the judgments in the cases of Sunder Singh and Balo Devi [supra]. Statement is taken on record. 5. Learned State Counsel states that the petitioner had set up a case based on the judgment in the case of Harbans Lal [supra] [Annexure A-1] which is altogether different and distinguishable. Learned State Counsel fairly submits that the mandate of law in the cases of Sunder Singh and Balo Devi [supra], is not in dispute. Even the applicability of the 4 2025:HHC:39612 said judgments in terms of the instant case needs to be examined. 6. Heard, Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Learned Counsel, for the petitioner and Mr. Hemant K. Verma, Learned Deputy Advocate General, for the Respondent- State. 7. Taking into account the entirety of facts and circumstances and the entitlement of daily wagers, for proportionate weightage of daily wage service, by treating 5 years of daily wage service as one year regular service and in giving the proportionate weightage of service towards regular service has been mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sunder Singh and Balo Devi [supra]. 8. Based on the mandate of law, the submissions made by Learned State Counsel appear to be genuine. In these circumstances, the applicability of the judgments in the cases of Sunder Singh and Balo Devi [supra] vis-à-vis the claim of the petitioner needs to be examined. DIRECTIONS: 9. In view of the above discussion and for 5 2025:HHC:39612 the reasons recorded hereinabove, the instant petition is disposed of, in the following terms:- (i) As prayed by Learned Counsel for the petitioner, petitioner is permitted to make a Fresh Representation, by asserting the claim for giving proportionate daily wage service with regular service for pension and other retiral benefits, if any, in terms of the judgments in the cases of Sunder Singh and Balo Devi [supra], within six weeks from today; (ii) Upon receipt of the Representation, the State Authorities shall examine the same and pass appropriate orders in the light of the aforesaid judgments in the cases of Sunder Singh and Balo Devi [supra], within six weeks thereafter; (iii) Needless to say, this Court has not adverted to the claims and rival contentions, which are left open for determination by the State Authorities concerned; and (iv) Costs made easy for respective parties. 10. In aforesaid terms, the instant petition and all pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall accordingly stand disposed of. (Ranjan Sharma) Judge November 21, 2025 [Bhardwaj]