IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 9159 of 2008. Decided on: 29.06.2010. Chini Ram. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and others. …Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Ms. Sunita Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner has sought directions to the respondents to count the period of services he had rendered initially under the Panchayat Department and thereafter under the Panchayat Samitis and to grant him pensionary benefits. Similar question was adjudicated upon by the learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA (D) No. 283/1996. The operative portion of the judgment dated 8.5.2002 reads thus: “I find that the facts of the present case are materially identical as those discussed in original application No. 1576/1993 except that in that original application services of the applicant rendered in District Board has not been counted while in the present case services rendered in the Panchayat Samiti had been counted in same department in respect of those employees who were absorbed in the Rural Development 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. Department but have not been counted in respect of those absorbed in the Panchayat Department of the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The present case, therefore, is on better footing than the one in original application No. 1576/1993. As such this original application is fully covered under the judgment of original application No. 1576/1993 as well as the case law discussed above and, therefore, is allowed. The respondents are directed to release all the retiral benefits in favour of the applicant after counting the service rendered by him in the Panchayat Samiti as also to give him the benefit of pay scale revised w.e.f. 11.1.1986. The applicant will also be entitled to an interest @ 12% on delayed payment of retiral benefit w.e.f. 1.1.1992 i.e. after two months from the date of his retirement. This order be implemented within a period of three months from today. Parties to bear their own costs.” 2. The State Government assailed this judgment passed by the learned Tribunal in OA (D) No. 283/1996 dated 8.5.2002 by way of CWP No. 1802/2002 in this Court. The same was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 31.7.2008. In other words, the judgment rendered by the Tribunal was upheld by this Court. 3. It is also jointly represented by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties that the present lis is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the learned Tribunal in OA (D) No. 283/1996 dated 8.5.2002 and judgment rendered in CWP No. 1802/2002 dated 31.7.2008. 4. Consequently, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to release all the retiral benefits to the petitioner after counting his services rendered by him in the Panchayat Department/Panchayat Samitis. He is also held entitled to interest @ 8% per annum on delayed payment of retrial benefits after two months from the date of his retirement. The judgment be implemented within a period of three months from today. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge June 29, 2010. (bhupender)