IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17346 of 2025 Decided on: 7th November, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhag Chand …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Parkash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. Tek Ram Sharma, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and respondent No.4, respectively. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to count the whole time contingent service rendered by him w.e.f. 01.08.2007 to 31.08.2007, followed by regularization without interruption, as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Relief has been claimed on the strength of the decisions rendered in Bimla Devi Versus State of H.P. & others2, Sunder Singh Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.3 and Balo Devi & others Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others4. It is, however, seen from the record that the petitioner has not preferred any representation for the redressal of his grievances raised in the writ petition. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring a representation within two weeks from today. In case such a representation is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments within a period of six weeks thereafter. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 2 CWP No.6688 of 2021, decided on 27.06.2025 3 Civil Appeal No.6309 of 2017, decided on 08.03.2018 4 Civil Appeal No.4792 of 2022, decided on 18.07.2022 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 07, 2025 Judge Mukesh