IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWPs No.6772, 6773, 6777, 6779, 6780, 6781 and 6782 of 2010. Decided on: 28th October, 2010. 1. CWP No.6772 of 2010. Chuni Lal. Vs. State of H.P. & others. 2. CWP No.6773 of 2010. Chuni Lal. Vs. State of H.P. & others. 3. CWP No.6777 of 2010. Bhagat Ram. Vs. State of H.P. & others. 4. CWP No.6779 of 2010. Joginder Singh. Vs. State of H.P. & others. 5. CWP No.6780 of 2010. Gurwatni. Vs. State of H.P. & others. 6. CWP No.6781 of 2010. Mast Ram. Vs. State of H.P. & others. 7. CWP No.6782 of 2010. Prem Nath. Vs. State of H.P. & others. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. For the petitioners : Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2 Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The issue raised in these writ petitions 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. 2. We are informed that the issue is covered in favour of the workers by the decision of this Court in State of Himachal Pradesh & others vs. Sarab Dayal in CWP No.180 of 2001 decided on 19.7.2007. 3. It is pointed out that the matter is pending before the Apex Court. The parties agree that they will also be bound by the outcome of the decision, now pending before the Apex Court, so that the case also need not be taken to the Apex Court. Therefore, these writ petitions are 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 petitioners herein also, the judgment will be implemented expeditiously subject to the result of the matter pending before the Apex Court. We make it clear that we have 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 petitioners. 4. The writ petitions are disposed of, so also the pending applications, if any. Dasti copy. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 28th October, 2010 (Justice V.K. Sharma), (tr) Judge. 3