IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P.(T) No. 15559 of 2008. Decided on: 17.08.2011. Sobha Ram. ….. Petitioner. -Versus- The State of Himachal Pradesh & others. …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. For the petitioner. : Mr. A.K. Gupta, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral): Petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis in Forest Division Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, H.P. on 01.01.1992. He has completed 10 years’ continuous service with 240 days in a block of twelve calendar months on 31.12.2001. He was regularized in the month of April, 2007. He has retired on 30th April, 2007. 2. Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that his client ought to have been permitted to work up to 60 years. 3. Mr. J. K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General, on the basis of amendment carried out in Rule 56 of the Fundamental 2 Rules vide notification dated 10th May, 2001, has vehemently argued that since the petitioner has been appointed after this notification, he has been rightly retired on 30th April, 2007. Petitioner has only completed 10 years’ continuous service with 240 days in a block of twelve calendar months on 31.12.2001. He has been regularized on 19th April, 2007. According to the amendment carried out in Rule 56 of the Fundamental Rules, a workman appointed on or after the date of publication of notification, i.e., 10th May, 2001 has to retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of 58 years. Petitioner has attained the age of 58 years on 30th April, 2007. There is no illegality in the order issued by the respondent-State, whereby the petitioner has been retired on 30th April, 2007. The same is in conformity with notification dated 10th May, 2001. 4. Accordingly, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. August 17, 2011. (bhupender)