Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4619 (HP)

KIRAN CHAUHAN v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/112/2025 · 2025-03-05

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.112 of 2025 Date of decision: 05.03.2025 Kiran Chauhan. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Ms. Nandita, Advocate, proxy Mr. K.K. Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to allow her to continue in service till her attaining the age of 60 years in light of law laid down in Satya Devi vs. State of H.P. & Ors1. 2. Noticing the contention of the petitioner, following order was passed in the matter on 03.01.2025:- “Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. Petitioner’s, contention is that she has wrongfully been retired on 30.04.2024 at the age of 58 years, whereas, she is entitled to continue in service till she attains the age of 60 years i.e. 30.04.2026 in light of 1CWP No.2274 of 2021, decided along with connected matters on 28.05.2024 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes -2- judgment dated 28.05.2024 rendered in CWP No. 2274 of 2021 (Satya Devi Vs. State of H.P. and others) and connected matters. Let learned Additional Advocate General to have instruction in the matter. List on 05.03.2025.” 3. Respondents in their instructions dated 03.03.2025 have not disputed that the case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid decision in Satya Devi’s1 case, therefore, there shall be a direction to the respondents to confer the benefit of the aforesaid decision to the petitioner. The petitioner shall be re-inducted in service forthwith and shall be allowed to continue to serve till she attains the age of 60 years. This, shall, however, be subject to outcome of the SLP filed by the respondents in the aforesaid decision. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 5th March, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)