1. Execution of pension entitlement — Compliance with prior judgment on service computation for pension under CCS (Pension) Rules. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 5510
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
Puran Dass – Appellant
Versus
State of HP – Respondent
Ex.Pet No.1036 of 2026
Important Points
The court ensured the correct computation of qualifying service for pension benefits in accordance with established judicial precedents, directing the implementation of a fresh consideration order.
Subject
Service Law - Pension
Act Referred
CCS (Pension) Rules 1972
Headnote
(A) Pensionary Benefits - Qualifying Service - Computation of service in light of judicial precedents - Failure to apply established legal principles in consideration orders constitutes a failure to comply with court directions. (Para 1)
(B) Execution Petition - Compliance - Issuance of fresh consideration order granting benefits in accordance with law leads to disposal of the execution proceedings. (Para 2, 3)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to pension based on the computation of qualifying service in light of the Sunder Singh and Balo Devi judgments.
(B) Execution Petition - Compliance - Issuance of fresh consideration order granting benefits in accordance with law leads to disposal of the execution proceedings. (Para 2, 3)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to pension based on the computation of qualifying service in light of the Sunder Singh and Balo Devi judgments.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T Thakur
For the Respondents: Seema Sharma
For the Appellants/Petitioners: T Thakur
For the Respondents: Seema Sharma
Table of Contents
2. Execution petition disposed of after compliance; liberty reserved for surviving grievances; costs paid. (Para 2 , 3 )
3. Is liberty to seek remedy preserved upon disposal of an execution petition?
Yes, the court reserved liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for any surviving grievances in accordance with law. (Para 3 )
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Following order was passed by this Court in present petition on 07.10.2026:-
“Pursuant to the final opportunity granted to the respondents to comply with the judgment rendered on 11.11.2024, the respondents have filed a compliance affidavit alongwith consideration order dated 08.09.2026. The said consideration order, despite recording that petitioner has to his credit 7 years, 2 months and 25 days of regular service and also 2 years of qualifying service against his eligible daily wage service in view of Sunder Singh Versus1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes which manner total service falling to theP credit of the petitioner in light of Sundar Singh1 & Balo Devi2 has been computed as 9 years, 2 months and 25 da.ys, yet petitioner's case for grant of pension has beHen turned down on the ground that he does not possess 10 years of requisite service as required under the CCS (Pensi on) Rules 1972. Apparentloy, while issuing the consideration order, respondent No. 2, Director, Animal Husbandry, Himachal Pradesh, h as not at all gone through the decision rendered in Sundar Singh1 & Balo Devi2 in terms of which petitioner’s case was required to be considered. At this stage, learned Deputy Advocate Goeneral seeks two days’ time to come up with fresh consideration order. Payer is allowed, however, subject to costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the petitioner on the next date of hearing. List on 09.10.2026.”
2. Pursuant to order, the learned Deputy Advocate General has handed over a bank draft in the sum of ₹10,000/- drawn in the name of the petitioner to his learned counsel towards costs imposed in the aforesaid order. Learned Deputy Advocate General has also placed on record order dated 08.10.2026 from the Director, Animal Husbandry, Himachal Pradesh conveying issuance of fresh consideration order dated 08.10.2026 extending benefit of Sunder Singh2 and Balo Devi3 in favour of the petitioner.
Copy of aforesaid order has also been appended alo.ngwith office instructions. In terms office order dated 08.10.2026, petitioner is now entitled to pension from due date. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that the aforesaid office order datefd 08.10.2026 shall be implemented within four weeks from today and due and admissible pension alongwtith pension arrears, if any, shall be released to the peutitioner within the aforesaid period.
3. In view of above, this execution petition is disposCed of. Liberty, however, is reserved to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy for the redressal of his surviving hgrievances, if any, in accordance with law. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also ito stand disposed of.
