1 2026:HHC:11874 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA LPA No. 63 of 2026 Date of decision: 09.04.2026 ________________________________________________________ State of HP & others ...Appellants Versus Mansha Devi …Respondent ________________________________________________________ Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin C. Negi, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ________________________________________________________ For the Appellants: Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General. For the respondents: Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. Mr. Rajesh Kosh, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. G.S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral) The State has laid challenge to the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 5690 of 2020, titled as Mansha Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, dated 13.05.2025, whereby directions were issued to the respondents to consider the case of the writ petitioner afresh for grant of pension and pensionary benefits to her in light of 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 decision rendered in LPA No. 196 of 2022, titled as Roop Lal Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others, decided on 11.10.2023. 2. The learned Single Judge had noticed that the petitioner’s husband-Sh. Kanshi Ram had rendered daily wage service in Class-IV Cadre in the respondent- Public Works Department w.e.f. 1975 to 31.12.1982 under different categories and his services were regularized on 01.01.1994 under Class-III Cadre. He had retired from the Government service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2000 after rendering six years and three months of regular service. Prior to regularization, he had put in 11 years of continuous daily wage service w.e.f. 1983 to 31.12.1993. The husband of the petitioner had died on 25.08.2009. Resultantly, he was denied the benefit of pension and pensionary benefits, on account of his not possessing the requisite qualifying service. 3. Resultantly, directions were issued by the learned Single Judge keeping in view the fact that in Roop Lal’s case, (supra), the principle laid down in the judgments of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 6309 3 of 2017, titled as Sunder Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, dated 08.03.2018 and Civil Appeal No. 4792 of 2022, titled as Balo Devi & others versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others, dated 18.07.2022, for granting the pension and pensionary benefits was followed, and therefore, consideration had been accordingly directed. It was also noticed that the appeal as such in Roop Lal’s case (supra) was dismissed on 18.03.2025. 4. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the matter having attained finality, the filing of the instant appeal is misconceived. In similar circumstances, we have also dismissed CMP(M) No. 129 of 2026 in LPA No. 105 of 2026, titled State of H.P. vs. Niram Chand, on 05.03.2026. As such, the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice. April 09, 2026 (Bipin C. Negi) (hemlata) Judge.