IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 2435 of 2011. Decided on: June 14, 2011. Sant Ram. Vrs. State of H.P. & ors. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the petitioner: Mr. Neel Kamal Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. R.K. Bawa, AG with Mr. J.K.Verma, Dy. AG. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:- “i) To grant actual monetary benefits and not notional benefits w.e.f. 1.1.1994 instead of 12.10.2006 as given by Respondent No. 4. ii) Petitioner is entitled for arrears/allowances and other consequential benefits from the due date i.e. 1.1.1994 instead of 12.10.2006 as given by the respondents along with interest @ 18% per annum. iii) Petitioner is also entitled for his retirement at the age of 60 years i.e. on 31.12.2011 instead of 31.12.2009 as his case for retirement at the age of 58 years is not covered by the Government notification issued on 10th May, 2001 (Annexure P-4) and accordingly the directions for modifying the orders dated 6.10.2010 issued by Respondent No. 4 to the above extent be issued to the respondents so as to cover the case of the petitioner for retiring him on 31.12.2011 instead of 31.12.2009 and also granting him actual monetary benefits instead of notional benefits w.e.f. 1.1.1994 and not from 12.10.2006. iv) Petitioner is entitled for pension and pensionary benefits/retiral benefits by virtue of his having qualified the qualifying service under the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972 as the petitioner has been given the benefit of regularization i.e. work charge status by the respondents on notional basis w.e.f. 1.1.1994, although the petitioner was entitled for actual benefit of regularization w.e.f. 1.1.1994, therefore, the entire period of regularization w.e.f. 1.1.1994 deserves to be counted for the purpose of pension/pensionary benefits/retiral benefits as he has been granted work charge status prior to May, 2003 and the 2 persons who are in regular service prior to this date are entitled for availing of the pension and pensionary benefits under the provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to actual monetary benefits on account of retrospective regularization. We are afraid that the contention cannot be appreciated. As a matter of fact and as can be seen from Annexure P-3 itself, the petitioner became entitled for retrospective regularization only after the period of absence being regularized on a medical certificate. The cause of action which arose in the year 1988 or 1992 or 1994, was pursued by the petitioner only in the year 2009. Be that as it may. As per the impugned order, the petitioner has now been rightly granted regularization w.e.f. 1.1.1994 limiting the actual monetary benefits for the period of 3 years and 2 months (38 months in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Jai Dev Gupta Versus State of H.P., reported in AIR 1998 SC 2819). As far as the second contention regarding entitlement to continue up to 60 years is concerned, in view of the regularization prior to 10.5.2001, the petitioner is entitled to continue up to 60 years. 3. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: The petitioner shall be entitled to continue in service till he attains the age of 60 years. The period from 1.1.1994 till superannuation as above, shall be counted for the purpose of pension and other eligible benefits, as qualifying service, except for back wages from 1.1.1994 to 12.10.1996. For the rest of the period of service of the petitioner, he shall be entitled to all service benefits. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. June 14, 2011. ( Justice Sanjay Karol), (karan/vs) Judge.