IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2572/2025 Decided on: 12.11.2025 Basant Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ……………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner is an ex-serviceman. He was enrolled in the Indian Army on 30.06.1975 and discharged from the same on 30.06.1999. He, thereafter, got registered his name in the concerned employment exchange. Petitioner appeared in batch-wise recruitment process for the post of Physical Education Teacher during the year 2001-2002, but was not selected being junior in batch. He eventually gained civil employment as Physical Education Teacher under office order dated 22.08.2003. Petitioner joined at the assigned place of 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 posting on 03.09.2003. He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.04.2013. The total length of regular service rendered by the petitioner as computed by the respondents was 9 years, 7 months and 27 days. This service fell short of the requisite ten years of qualifying service prescribed for grant of pensionary benefits under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Consequently, in terms of the said Rules, pensionary benefits were not sanctioned in his favour, hence the grievance. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the approved military service rendered by the petitioner is liable to be counted for computing length of service under the civil employment for the purposes of grant of pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner is in receipt of army pension for the service rendered by him in the armed forces. The approved military service rendered by him has been taken into consideration towards his pay fixation. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any provisions of applicable rules, regulations or law for counting the approved military service towards length of regular civil employment in order to earn civil pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been impleaded as a party in 3 Balwinder Kaur vs. State of HP and others and other connected matters2, wherein one of the reliefs claimed pertains to ante-dating the date of petitioner’s appointment. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to seek appropriate remedy for availing pension, in case, his prayer for ante-dating the date of his appointment in civil employment, is allowed. In view of above, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 12th November, 2025(rohit) 2 CWP No. 2341/2020