High CourtsDivision Bench(2010) 12 SHI CK 0190

Ganga Ram vs State of H.P. and Another

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 31 December 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kurian Joseph, C.J · V.K. Sharma, J
CASE NUMBER
CWP No. 8254 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 308 words

Kurian Joseph, C.J.—The writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

a) The Hon''ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to count daily wage services of the Petitioner towards the qualifying period for the purposes of pension and further the Respondents may directed to consider the case in view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Hon''ble Court in CWP No. 180 of 2001 titled as State of HP v. Sarab Dyal.

2.

The issue raised in this petition pertains to the question whether 50% of the daily waged service is liable to be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

3.

It is informed that the issue is covered in favour of the workers by the decision of this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Sarab Dayal in CWP No. 180 of 2001 decided on 19.7.2007.

4.

It is pointed out that the matter is pending before Apex Court. The parties agree that they will also be bound by the out come of the decision, now pending before the Apex Court, so that these cases also need not be taken to the Apex Court. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of, making it clear that in case the decision of this Court is implemented in the case of the similarly situated persons, in the case of the applicant herein also, the judgment will be implemented expeditiously subject to the result of the matter pending before the Apex Court. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and therefore, it will be certainly open to the Authority concerned to examine whether on facts Sarab Dayal''s case would apply to the applicant.

5.

The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.