Whether approved for reporting? 1

G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral)

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.11.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No.8824 of 2023, titled as Daleep Kumar Thakur Vs. State of H.P. & another, whereby the writ petitioner was held enttitled to emoluments for two years i.e. from the date of his retirement w.e.f. 01.06.2023 to 31.05.2025 and the actual payable emoluments for the period were ordered to be paid to the petitioner after adjusting/setting off the pension paid to the writ petitioner for the period.¹Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. The writ petitioner was a recipient of National Award received by him during the year 2011-2012 and in view of the notification dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure A-3), the Award having been given by the Hon’ble President of India it was held that there was a discrimination being created by the respondents. The defence that it was for the contribution of community and social service activities of National Service Scheme (NSS), could not as such take away the right and it was also part of the school curricular and the said notification superceded all the earlier notifications, since the employee had already retired on attaining the age of 60 years and he had been denied the benefits of two years extended service as per the notification led the learned Single Judge to pass the order in favour of the petitioner.

3. The learned Single Judge has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Apex Court in Union of India and Others Vs. K.V. Jankiraman and Others (1991) 4 SCC 109 and State of Kerala and Others Vs. E.K. Bhaskaran Pillai (2007) 6 SCC 524 to grant monetary benefits, that if the employee was kept away on account of the State action, he would be entitled for the said benefits.

4. Counsel for the appellants-State has again told the line which is taken in the reply that it was the benefit which only flowed, if the selection of teachers for State Award made is made by the Committee constituted for purpose at District level, Directorate level and State level for grant of National Award to the teachers. The petitioner had been awarded Indira Gandhi National Service Scheme Awards for the period 2011-2012 on 19.11.2012 under separate set of Scheme and eligibility conditions, which was not covered under Government notifications.

5. We have gone through the notification dated 24.09.2015 (Annexure A-3) on the basis of which, the petitioner was claiming the said relief and we find that there is widely worded and places the awardees at two different pedestal i.e. the extension of two years of salary increment to teachers who have received national awards and one year of extension of service to teachers who have received state level awards. The same reads as under:-

“Government of Himachal Pradesh

Elementary Education Department

D.N.C.C. (1-7)-3/2007 Volume-III Dated Shimla-2

24.9.2015

Notification

Superseding all the notifications (orders) made earlier, the Governor of Himachal Pradesh gladly approves the extension of two years of salary increment to teachers who have received national awards and one year of extension of service to teachers who have received state level awards.

This direction will come into effect from the date of issue of the notification.

By order

Additional Chief Secretary Education

Government of Himachal Pradesh.”

6. A perusal of the Award would go on to show that the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, Department of Youth Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi had granted the said Award to the petitioner while he was working in the Directorate of Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh and the Award was granted by the Hon’ble President of India on 19.11.2012 in Darbar Hall at Rashtrapati Bhawan. The same would be clear from the letter dated 26.10.2012 (Annexure P-1), whereby the petitioner