Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/7602/2023 on 28 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP No.7602 of 2023.
Decided on : 28
th October
, 2026
Chet Ram & Anr. ...Petitioners.
Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents.
Coram:
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Ravinder Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Rangil Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard at this stage.
2. The petitioners have prayed for following substantive relief:- “a. That writ in the nature of mandamus may very kindly be issued directing the respondents to count the services rendered by petitioners on daily waged basis for the purpose of pensionary benefits as per judgment rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 6309/2017, titled as Sunder Singh vs. State of H.P. & others (Annexure P-4) and to grant such benefit along with arrear.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue raised in this petition by the petitioners has already been adjudicated 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 29/10/2026 08:32:10 :::CIS
2 upon in Sunder Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.2 and Balo Devi & Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.3.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the respective cases of the petitioners in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.
5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/ competent authority to consider and decide the respective cases of the petitioners in accordance with law as well as taking into consideration the above judgments within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 28th October, 2026.
(jai)
2 Civil Appeal No. 6309 of 2017 decided on 08.03.2028. 3 Civil Appeal No. 4792 of 2022 decided on 18.07.2022. High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 29/10/2026 08:32:10 :::CIS