IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10045 of 2026 Decided on: 23rd June, 2026 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The Executive Engineer, HPPWD Division Ghumarwin …..Petitioner Versus Leela Devi .....Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondent: Nemo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner-State feels aggrieved against the order dated 07.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority, Himachal Pradesh under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, ordering payment of gratuity in favour of the respondent in terms thereof. 2. Learned Assistant Advocate General submits that facts of this case are almost similar to the facts of 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2

State of H.P. & Ors. Versus Binu Ram2, which, in turn, was based upon Bindumati Versus State of H.P. and others3. Decision in Bindumati3 is stated to have been accepted and implemented by the respondents therein. Learned Assistant Advocate General further submits that the issue of law involved in the instant case is the same as was involved in Binu Ram2 & Bindumati3 and further that the same is covered against the petitioner-State under the aforesaid decisions. Accordingly, on the analogy of the decisions in Binu Ram2 & Bindumati3 and following the reasoning therein, this writ petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 23, 2026 Judge Mukesh 2 CWP No.15443 of 2024, decided on 24.02.2026 3 CWP No.4632 of 2025, decided on 07.11.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10045 of 2026 Decided on: 23rd June, 2026 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The Executive Engineer, HPPWD Division Ghumarwin …..Petitioner Versus Leela Devi .....Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondent: Nemo. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner-State feels aggrieved against the order dated 07.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Deputy Labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate Authority, Himachal Pradesh under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, ordering payment of gratuity in favour of the respondent in terms thereof. 2. Learned Assistant Advocate General submits that facts of this case are almost similar to the facts of 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2

State of H.P. & Ors. Versus Binu Ram2, which, in turn, was based upon Bindumati Versus State of H.P. and others3. Decision in Bindumati3 is stated to have been accepted and implemented by the respondents therein. Learned Assistant Advocate General further submits that the issue of law involved in the instant case is the same as was involved in Binu Ram2 & Bindumati3 and further that the same is covered against the petitioner-State under the aforesaid decisions. Accordingly, on the analogy of the decisions in Binu Ram2 & Bindumati3 and following the reasoning therein, this writ petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 23, 2026 Judge Mukesh 2 CWP No.15443 of 2024, decided on 24.02.2026 3 CWP No.4632 of 2025, decided on 07.11.2025