IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.44 of 2026 Decided on: 07.01.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dhruv Raj …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Anr .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N.Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for grant of following substantive reliefs:- “A) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to count the service rendered by the Petitioner on contract basis i.e. w.e.f. 29.05.2012 to 12.05.2017, as qualifying service for the purpose of increments and pensionary benefits and Death Cum Retirement Gratuity and commuted value of pension as well 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 as leave encashment, other retiral benefits under Central Civil Services Pension Rules 1972. B. That this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding the respondents to extend the benefit of pension to the Petitioner under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, by reckoning the entire period of contractual service rendered by the Petitioner as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and other retiral benefits. It is further prayed that the respondents may be directed to obtain a fresh option from the Petitioner and accordingly grant the benefit of coverage under the Old Pension Scheme, in the interest of justice and fair play. 3. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that case of the petitioner, issues raised by him in the petition, reliefs claimed and the defence of the respondents thereto have already been considered and adjudicated upon in Ravinder Singh Rana Vs. State of H.P. and Others2, which was disposed of with the following operative directions:- “In view of above submission made by learned Advocate General, the impugned orders passed in the individual cases contrary to above submissions and position of law, are set-aside. Contractual service rendered by the petitioners followed by regularization be computed as qualifying service for purpose of pension in 2 CWP No.9084 of 2023 decide alongwith connected matters don 18.12.2025 3 accordance with State of H.P. & Anr. Vs. Sheela Devi3 & State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Vs. Ram Chand and Ors.4. This exercise be completed within three months from today. Petitioners shall be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy, at an appropriate stage for the redressal of their surviving grievances, if any, in accordance with law, in case necessity so arises in future.” 4. It is an admitted position of the learned counsel for the parties that the directions issued in Ravinder Singh Rana2 will squarely apply to the instance case as well. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the order that the directions issued in Ravinder Singh Rana2 shall mutatis mutandis apply to the instant case as well. With the above observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 7, 2026 Judge R.Atal 3 SLP(C) No. 10399/2020 decided on 07.08.2023 4 SLP (C) Diary No(s). 8008 of 2025