IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.466 of 2009 Date of decision : July 18, 2011 Mani Ram …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K.S. Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General, and Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Surjit Singh, Judge(Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. In view of a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Shri Krishan Chand versus State of H.P. and another and connected matters, reported in Latest HLJ 2010 (HP) 414, petitioner cannot be heard to say that he having been engaged as daily wager, prior to the issuance of notification, reducing the retirement age of Class IV employees from 60 years to 58 years, is entitled to continue to serve upto the age of 60 years. In the said judgment, it has been held that an employee is to be treated as having been appointed to a service, for the purpose of age of superannuation, in terms of Fundamental Rule 56, when his services are regularized and not from the date of initial engagement as daily wager. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 3. Admittedly, petitioner’s services were regularized, after the issuance of the notification, reducing the age of superannuation from 60 years to 58 years. So, he is covered by the notification, in question. The petition, thus, being without merit, is dismissed. 4. However, it is ordered that in case the petitioner has put in requisite number of qualifying service, he will be granted pension and other retiral benefits, if any, in accordance with the Rules applicable in his case, within a period of two months. Petition stands disposed of. July 18, 2011(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J