IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 5842 of 2023. Decided on :17 th September , 2026 Sunita ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Archana Dutt, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: “(i). That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner from part time to daily wager after completion of 10 years w.e.f. 2002 instead of 2004. (ii). That the respondents may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization after completion of 8 years of daily wage services w.e.f. 2010 and further consider the case of the petitioner for pension under Old Pension Scheme by counting the services w.e.f. 2010. (iii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to the case of the applicant for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 During hearing of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would confine her claim for grant of pension in view of law laid down in Sunder Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.3. Matter has accordingly been heard. 2. From the pleadings and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, following facts emerge: Petitioner served as part-time worker with the respondents w.e.f. February 1992 to 31.07.2004. Her services were converted on daily wage status w.e.f. 01.08.2004. Petitioner continued to serve as daily wager till 22.06.2017 i.e. for a period of 12 years, 10 months, and 21 days. Respondents regularised services of petitioner on 23.06.2017. Petitioner superannuated at the age of 60 years on 31.12.2024 after rendering around 7 years and 6 months of regular service. 3. Apparently, it appears that in case 12 years of daily wage service, as claimed to have been rendered by the petitioner, is computed in view of law laid down in Sunder Singh2 and Balo Devi3, petitioner would be entitled to add two years more to her regular service of 7 years and 6 2 Civil Appeal No. 6309 of 2017 decided on 08.03.2028. 3 Civil Appeal No. 4792 of 2022 decided on 18.07.2022. 3 months, taking her total tally of service countable for eligibility towards pension as 9 years, 6 months. If that would be the position, then in view of Sunder Singh2 and Balo Devi3, total service of the petitioner in this manner being more than 9 years 6 months, she would be entitled to pension. However, the facts are required to be examined by the respondents. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent No.3/competent authority to consider the case of the petitioner for determining her eligibility for grant of pension under the Old Pension Scheme, CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, by examining the facts of her case vis-a-vis Sunder Singh2 and Balo Devi3. The needful be done within three weeks from today. In case the petitioner is found entitled to pension, the pension as admissible to her along with arrears thereof be released in her favor within three weeks thereafter. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 17th September, 2026. (jai)