Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, C.J.,, RANJAN SHARMA
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Satpal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Ranjan Sharma, J.
CMP [M] No.89 of 2025
Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, we are of the opinion that sufficient cause has been made out to condone the delay. Therefore the delay of 29 days in filing the appeal is condoned. In aforesaid terms, the application stands disposed of.
LPA No.78 of 2025
2. Appellants-State of Himachal Pradesh has come up before this Court, assailing the judgment passed by the Learned Single Judge in CWP No. 9317 of 2024, titled as Satpal versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., decided on 05.09.2024[referred to as Impugned Judgment], wherein, the claim of Respondent-Employee herein, {being the writ petitioner}, was accepted for continuation in service upto the age of 60 years in terms of the mandate of the Division Bench of this Court, in CWP No. 2274 of 2021, titled as Satya Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others alongwith connected matters, decided on 28.05.2024, with directions to Appellants-State Authorities to continue the petitioner in service till he attains the age of 60 years [i.e. upto 30.9.2026].
CHALLENGE TO IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 05.09.2024 IN INSTANT APPEAL:
3. Appe
The court affirmed that all Class-IV employees must retire at 60 years, rejecting arbitrary distinctions based on engagement dates as discriminatory under Article 14.
Point of Law : If date of engagement/appointment is prior to 10.05.2001, the Class-IV employee will continue to serve till 60 years of age. In case, it is later than 10.05.2001, then restriction in a....
Changes to retirement age rules are prospective and cannot be applied retroactively unless explicitly stated.
(1) Whether age of superannuation should be enhanced is a matter of policy. If a decision has been taken to enhance age of superannuation, date with effect from which enhancement should be made falls....
whenever a new benefit is granted and/or new scheme is introduced, it might be possible for the State to provide a cut-off date taking into consideration its financial resources. But the same shall n....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of G.O.Ms.No.15, dtd. 31/1/2022, which enhanced the age of superannuation of Government Employees from 60 years to 62 years, t....
Since the enhancement of the age of superannuation is a ‘public function’ channelised by the provisions of the statute and the service regulations, the doctrine of promissory estoppel cannot be used ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
