Himachal Pradesh High Court
EX.P./1277/2026 on 14 October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
2026:HHC:45466
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No.1277
of 2026
Decided on: 14
th October, 2026
_______________________________________________________ Kulbhushan Rehalia ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others
...Respondents ________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Ashil Bhushan Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.P. Singh, Deputy Advocate General. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) By way of present execution petition, the petitioner is seeking implementation of the directions contained in the judgment dated 24.12.2025, passed in CWP No.20488 of 2025, titled, Kulbhushan Rehalia vs. State of H.P. and another.
2. It is apt to reproduce the relevant direction of the judgment, which reads as under:- “4. 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 petitioner followed by regularization be computed as qualifying service for purpose of pension in accordance with Sheela Devi & Ram Chand. This exercise be completed within three months from today. Petitioner shall be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy,
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
at an appropriate stage for the redressal of his surviving grievances, if any, in accordance with law, in case necessity so arises in future.”
3. A perusal of the directions passed by this Court clearly reveals that it was directed that the contractual service rendered by the petitioner followed by regularization be computed as qualifying service for the purpose of pension in view of the judgments passed in SLP(C) No.10399 of 2020, titled, State of H.P. and another vs. Sheela Devi, decided on 07.08.2023 and LPA No.232 of 2024, titled, Ram Chand and others vs. State of H.P. and others, decided on 02.09.2024 within three months from the date of passing of the judgment.
4. After passing of the aforesaid judgment, the respondents have issued the Pension Payment Order (PPO), thereby granting pension @Rs.29,200/- per month to the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner had retired from service on 30.09.2019, he was entitled to pension w.e.f. 01.10.2019 to 31.03.2023, gratuity, commutation and other retiral benefits arising from the counting of contractual service, whereas he has only been granted pension w.e.f. 01.04.2023.
6. Since this Court had only given the directions to the respondents to compute the contractual service followed by regularization as qualifying service for the purpose of pension, the mandate contained in the aforesaid judgment has duly been complied with and nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present execution petition and the same is closed. However, in case, the petitioner is aggrieved by the non-grant of pension to him w.e.f. 01.10.2019 to 31.03.2023 and other benefits, he may avail an appropriate remedy in accordance with law, if any.
7. The execution petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
th October, 2026
( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (ankit) Judge