IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No. 298 of 2011. Decided on: 22nd November, 2011. State of H.P. & others. … Appellants.. Versus Chuni Lal Beldar. … Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. For the Appellant: Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. AG and Mr. J.K. Verma, DAG. For the Respondents : Mr. Vijay Bhatia, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The State has come up in appeal against the judgment dated 24th February, 2011. The issue pertains to continuance of Class IV employee upto the age of 60 years. There is no dispute on the question of law that all those who have been appointed in regular service as Class IV employee prior to 10.5.2011, they are entitled to continue upto the age of 60 years. In LPA No. 196 of 2010 titled as Bar Chand vs. State of H.P. and others decided on 21st October, 2010, this Court had observed that all those, who have been appointed even if on daily waged service prior to 10.5.2001 would be entitled to continue upto the age of 60 years. That judgment has been later distinguished as one rendered per incurium since the position under the Rules was not considered in that case. What was considered in that case 2 was the Notification issued by the Government. As per the amendment in FR 56, only those who have been regularly appointed/regularized in service prior to 10.5.2001, they alone will be entitled to continue upto 60 years. 2. Learned Single Judge in the judgment under appeal has followed LPA No. 196 of 2010, which is no more a good law in view of the position under law that being a judgment rendered per incurium it has no precedential value and it is no more binding. As far as the facts of the case of the petitioner are concerned, it is an admitted fact that he had entered regular service only in the year 2007, though he was on daily waged service prior to 2001. Only in case the writ petitioner entered regular service before 10.5.2001, he would be entitled to continue upto the age of 60 years. 3. In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed, the judgment under appeal is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice 22nd November, 2011. (Justice Sanjay Karol), (tr) Judge. 3