1 2026:HHC:17415 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Review Petition No. 108 of 2025 Date of decision: 15.05.2026. ________________________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh ...Petitioner Versus Puran Chand …Respondent ________________________________________________________ Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General. For the respondent: None. G.S. Sandhawalia , Chief Justice (Oral) This Review Petition has been filed by the State. Despite being served, the respondent has chosen not to put in appearance neither on 20.03.2026 nor today. 2. Review is sought of the order passed by us in CMP (M) No. 2091 of 2024 & LPA No. 111 of 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh & others Vs. Puran Chand, on 22.03.2025, whereby we had dismissed the LPA on the ground that the Co-ordinate Bench in CWP No. 2274 of 2021, titled as Satya Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradsh & others, had decided the issue, whereby a Class-IV employee was held entitled to continue in service till he/she attains the age of 60 years. 3. At the time of decision of the LPA, i.e. on 22.03.2025, there was no stay granted in the SLP (Civil) No. 20496 of 2024. 4. In such circumstances, we had taken the view that in case the petitioner performs his duty and the SLP is dismissed, the State would not have to give equivalent amount without taking work from the employee in question. However, thereafter, stay was granted by the Apex Court on 24.03.2025 in the connected matters, i.e. two days later from the date of 3 the order passed in the LPA. Thereafter, the Review Petition was filed. 5. Resultantly, learned Counsel for the State pointed out that thereafter, we have consistently admitted the Letters Patents Appeal, the lead case being LPA No. 228 of 2025, State of H.P and others vs. Rukmi Devi and others and stay has also been granted in those cases. 6. Keeping in view the said development, we deem it fit to recall the order dated 22.03.2025 and restore the LPA to its original position, moreso, when the initial order was passed, we had dismissed the LPA in limini, without calling upon the employee. Ordered accordingly. 7. The appeal is Admitted. 8. Post admission notice be issued to the respondent returnable within four weeks, on taking steps within one week. 9. List alongwith LPA No. 228 of 2025, State of H.P and others vs. Rukmi Devi and others. 4 10. Operation and execution of the order dated 31.07.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 7268 of 2024, titled as Puran Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others, shall remain stayed, during the pendency of the appeal. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice. May 15, 2026 (Ranjan Sharma) (hemlata) Judge.