IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 16099 of 2008. Date of decision: 11.4.2011 Chuni Lal …. Petitioner Versus State of H.P & ors. .... Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the petitioner: Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the respondents: Sh.Vivek Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General. Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed that half of his service rendered by him on daily waged basis has to be counted for the purpose of grant of pension. This Court in State of H.P & ors. Vs. Sarab Dayal, Latest HLJ 2007(2) Volume 18 (HP) 1292 has clearly held that 50% of the continuous service rendered by an employee on daily waged basis has to be counted while calculating his qualifying service for the purpose of pension. 2 The mandays chart in respect of the petitioner has been filed by the State and this mandays chart shows that right from 1989 till 1998, the petitioner worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year. He was granted work charge status of Beldar w.e.f. 1.4.1998. The services rendered by the petitioner on daily waged basis prior to that date works out to nine years and six months. The petitioner had worked for 10 years on daily wages, 50% of which works out to 5 years. He was granted work charge status w.e.f. 1.4.1998 and retired on 30.9.2007, i.e., nine years and six months. If half of his services rendered on daily waged basis is taken into consideration, the total qualifying service works out to 14 years and 6 months. The respondents are, therefore, directed to treat the qualifying service of the petitioner to be 14 years and 6 months and to calculate his pension and other retiral benefits accordingly. The needful be done latest by 31.8.2011 and the entire amount due and payable to the petitioner alongwith interest @ 6% per annum be paid to him on or before the said date failing which the State shall be held liable 3 to pay interest @ 12% per annum from the date of retirement of the petitioner. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. April 11, 2011 (Deepak Gupta) (m) Judge