Bimla Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Bimla Devi Vs the State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.2/Competent Authority to examine the petitioner's grievance regarding sanction of pension in accordance with law and the attending facts and circumstances, and to pass an appropriate order within six weeks after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. No substantive adjudication of pension entitlement was made.

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner, whose qualifying regular service as Supervisor falls short by two months of the requisite 9 years and 9 months for grant of pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972, is entitled to pension given that the shortfall is alleged to have been caused by the respondents' delay in declaring the examination result and completing her appointment as Supervisor.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the facts on record and the absence of any reply from the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/Competent Authority to look into the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law and the attending facts and circumstances, and appropriate order is to be passed on the grievance within six weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The court did not itself adjudicate entitlement to pension.

Key takeaways

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, connected with the writ petition were also ordered to stand disposed of.ratio¶28-29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP No.20748 of 2025, decided on 08.07.2026 by Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua (High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla). Petitioner Bimla Devi served about 20 years (1984 to 2005) as Anganwari Worker and 9 years and 7 months as Supervisor (ICDS), retiring on 31.03.2015. Her qualifying regular service fell short by 2 months of the requisite 9 years and 9 months for pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972, which she attributed to the respondents' delay — the written examination having been held on 19.01.2003 but the interview occurring only on 28.05.2005 and regular appointment issued on 31.05.2005 (joined 31.08.2005). With respondents failing to file a reply despite repeated opportunities, the Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2/Competent Authority to examine the grievance in accordance with law and pass an appropriate order within six weeks after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. The Court did not itself decide entitlement to pension.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.20748 of 2025

Decided on: 08.07.2026

Bimla Devi …..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and others.

.....Respondents

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the Petitioner: Mr. Pawan K Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Chaudhary, Assistant Advocate General.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Despite grant of repeated opportunities,

respondents have not filed the reply. The matter has accordingly been heard at this stage.

2. The grievance of the petitioner was noticed as under in the order passed on 30.12.2025:-

“Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

Petitioner rendered 20 years of service from 1984 to 2005 as Anganwari Worker and 09 years & 07 months of service as Supervisor. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was delay in

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

2

petitioner’s regular appointment as Supervisor. The delay was attributable to the respondents. Petitioner cannot be penalized for that reason and debarred from pension, there being shortfall of two months in the qualifying service required for the purpose of pension. Let the respondents file reply to the writ petition within four weeks.

List thereafter.”

3. The case set up by the petitioner is that she was employed as Anganwari Worker during the year 198384 at Anganwari Centre Narola, Tehsil Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. Respondents issued an advertisement for the post of Supervisor (ICDS-Integrated Child Development Services). Written examination was held on 19.01.2003. Petitioner appeared in the examination. It was more than two years later i.e. in the year 2005, that petitioner was called for interview on 28.05.2005. Petitioner appeared in the interview and was declared qualified for the post of Supervisor. On 31.05.2005, petitioner was given regular appointment as Supervisor. Petitioner is stated to have joined as such on 31.08.2005. Petitioners retired on 31.03.2015 after rendering 9 years and 7 months of regular service. Petitioner’s grievance is that respondents have not sanctioned pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1972, in her favour in view of her service

3

short by 2 months from the requisite 9 years and 9 months.

Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that had the respondents declared the result of the examination conducted for the post of Supervisor in time, petitioner would have been issued appointment order much earlier and she would have also joined at a prior date which would have enabled her to complete the requisite service of 9 years and 9 months to become eligible for grant of pension.

4. In view of the facts placed on record and the there being no reply from the respondents, in the given circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2/Competent Authority to look into the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law and the attending facts and circumstances. Appropriate order be passed on the grievance of the petitioner within six weeks from today after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any,

also to stand disposed of.

July 8, 2026 R.Atal