IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17834 of 2025 Decided on: 17th November, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhama Devi …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Anuja Mehta, Advocate. For the Respondents: 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. In view of the relief claimed by the petitioner, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the nature of order being passed hereinafter, reply to the 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 writ petition is not required to be called for from the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner is a retired Class-IV employee. Her case for grant of pension under the Old Pension Scheme- CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 has been rejected by the respondents under office communication dated nil, May, 2025 (Annexure P-4) on the ground that she had exercised option for coming over to the CCS (Pension) Rules beyond 60 days’ timeline mentioned in office memorandum dated 04.05.2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this case has already been considered and adjudicated upon in Reshmo Devi Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to consider her case afresh in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 2 CWP No.11004 of 2025, decided alongwith connected matters on 10.07.2025 3 5. In view of above, notwithstanding office communication dated nil, May, 2025 (Annexure P-4), this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the case of the petitioner afresh in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgment in the case of Reshmo Devi2 by passing appropriate order, within a period of four 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 November 17, 2025 Judge Mukesh