2026:HHC:7409 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 5586 of 2024 Decided on: 17.03.2026 Alam Chand …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 _____________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.P. Singh, Deputy Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for the following relief:- “(i) That writ of certiorari may kindly be issued, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 14.06.2016 (Annexure P-4). (ii) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to grant regularisation/work charge status to the petitioner w.e.f. January, 2008 in view of 7 years regularisation policy of the State dated Government (Annexure P-5) 31.08.2012 as well as the ratio laid down by this Hon'ble Court in State of H.P. v/s Surajrmani with all consequential benefits. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:7409 (iii) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent department to grant the pension to the petitioner w.e.f. 30.11.2018. (iv) That writ of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondent department to pay salary to the petitioner w.e.f. 30.11.2016 till 30.11.2018, in view of the fact that the petitioner was entitled to be retired on attaining the age of 60 years, but he has been given retirement on completion of his 58 years of age..” 2. The stand of the State demonstrates that inter alia it stood mentioned therein that the petitioner is placing reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in Surajmani’s case, which judgment stood assailed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the matter was pending adjudication. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that now the Surajmani’s case has been decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and this writ petition can be disposed of with the direction that let the benefits be granted the petitioner as have been conferred upon in Surajmani’s case, as modified by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Ordered accordingly. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that now let the benefits be conferred upon the petitioner, 3 2026:HHC:7409 in terms of the prayer made in the writ petition, in light of the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Surajmani’s case. The petition stands disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge March 17, 2026 (narender)