SHAM SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent') has preferred this application seeking directions therein for permitting them to retire/superannuate the non-applicant/ Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'petitioner') after attaining the age of 58 years.

(2.) The Government of Himachal Pradesh vide memorandum dated 29.03.2013 decided to raise the retirement age of visually handicapped persons from 58 to 60 years and basing his claim on the aforesaid memorandum coupled with the decision rendered by this Court in CWP No. 1577 of 2018 titled State of H.P. and others vs. Krishan Chand, decided on 5th November, 2018, the petitioner had filed CWP No.398 of 2019, titled Sham Sharma vs. State of H.P. and others, which was decided by this Court vide order dated 30.10.2019, which reads as under:

(3.) It is further not in dispute that the aforesaid memorandum has now been withdrawn vide memorandum No. Fin(C)-A(3)-2/2013 dated 4th November, 2019 that: