IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.2362 of 2025 Decided on: 4th March, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Krishani Devi ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Sikand Shah, Advocate vice Mr. Dinesh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to allow her to continue in service till she attains the age of 60 years in light of law laid down in Satya Devi Vs. State of H.P. and others2. 2. Noticing the contention of the petitioner, following order was passed in the matter on 14.02.2025: - “CWP No. 2362 of 2025 Heard. Notice. Mr. Gobind Kolra, Learned Additional 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 CWP No. 2274 of 2021, decided alongwith connected matters on 28.05.2024 - 2 - Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 4. As prayed for by Learned State Counsel reply be filed within two weeks. List the matter before appropriate Bench on 04.03.2025. CMP No. 2280 of 2025 Heard. Notice in aforesaid terms. The petitioner-Krishani Devi is claiming the benefit of continuity/reinstatment in terms of the mandate of this Court in CWP No. 7224 of 2021 titled as ‘Satya Devi vs. State of HP & Ors.’ on 28.05.2024. Respondents to file reply on or before 04.03.2025. While filing reply, the respondents shall incorporate as to whether case of the petitioner is covered in terms of the mandate of Satya Devi [supra] or not. In case the claim is covered, respondents are free to take further consequential action, in accordance with the mandate in the case of Satya Devi above in favour of the petitioner, on or before the next date of hearing.” 2. 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’s 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 - 3 - SLP filed by the respondents in the aforesaid decision. The present petition is disposed in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge March 4,2025 R.Atal