2026:HHC:36871 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15111 of 2026 Date of Decision: 31.08.2026 _______________________________________________________ Murari Lal Sharma …….Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Narender Guleria, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. K. B. Khajuria, Advocate, for the respondent-Bank. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs:- “i. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.04.2026 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure P-4); ii. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, holding and declaring that the expression Pay occurring in Regulation 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 is required to be interpreted in accordance with the statutory definition contained in the said Regulations, and consequently direct respondent No.1 to determine and compute the Gratuity payable to the petitioner accordingly; 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:36871

iii. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, holding and declaring that the petitioner is entitled to additional Gratuity for the service rendered beyond Thirty years on the basis of 45 days’ pay for each completed year of service beyond thirty years under Regulation 72(3) of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 and consequently direct respondent No.1 to compute and release the same; iv. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing respondent No.1 to calculate the Gratuity of the petitioner and release the differential Gratuity payable to the petitioner together with interest thereon from the date of Gratuity became due till the date of its actual payment, in accordance with law.” 2. Before reply, if any, could be called from the respondents, learned counsel representing the parties fairly state that case at hand is squarely covered by judgment dated 19.08.2026 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 14116 of 2026 titled Ramesh Kumar Verma vs. H.P. Gramin Bank & other alongwith connected matters, wherein direction came to be issued to respondent No. 2 to decide the respective gratuity claims of the petitioners in those cases, by taking into consideration the applicable Regulation 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010.

3. Having perused the aforesaid judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court vis-à-vis averments contained in the petition as well as the prayer made therein, this Court finds that issue 3 2026:HHC:36871 raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Verma case (supra), as such, there appears to be no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide claim of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of payment of gratuity in light of judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Verma case (supra) and in terms of Regulation 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 expeditiously. The impugned order dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P-4) is quashed and set-aside. Needless to say, authority concerned shall do the needful strictly in terms of the directions contained in paragraph 4 of the judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Verma case (supra). 5. The parties through their respective counsel are directed to cause their presence before the authority concerned on 07.09.2026, enabling it to do the needful. 4 2026:HHC:36871

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 31,2026 (shankar)

2026:HHC:36871 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15111 of 2026 Date of Decision: 31.08.2026 _______________________________________________________ Murari Lal Sharma …….Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Narender Guleria, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. K. B. Khajuria, Advocate, for the respondent-Bank. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs:- “i. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.04.2026 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure P-4); ii. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, holding and declaring that the expression Pay occurring in Regulation 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 is required to be interpreted in accordance with the statutory definition contained in the said Regulations, and consequently direct respondent No.1 to determine and compute the Gratuity payable to the petitioner accordingly; 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:36871

iii. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature of mandamus, holding and declaring that the petitioner is entitled to additional Gratuity for the service rendered beyond Thirty years on the basis of 45 days’ pay for each completed year of service beyond thirty years under Regulation 72(3) of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 and consequently direct respondent No.1 to compute and release the same; iv. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing respondent No.1 to calculate the Gratuity of the petitioner and release the differential Gratuity payable to the petitioner together with interest thereon from the date of Gratuity became due till the date of its actual payment, in accordance with law.” 2. Before reply, if any, could be called from the respondents, learned counsel representing the parties fairly state that case at hand is squarely covered by judgment dated 19.08.2026 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 14116 of 2026 titled Ramesh Kumar Verma vs. H.P. Gramin Bank & other alongwith connected matters, wherein direction came to be issued to respondent No. 2 to decide the respective gratuity claims of the petitioners in those cases, by taking into consideration the applicable Regulation 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010.

3. Having perused the aforesaid judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court vis-à-vis averments contained in the petition as well as the prayer made therein, this Court finds that issue 3 2026:HHC:36871 raised in the instant proceedings already stands adjudicated by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Verma case (supra), as such, there appears to be no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide claim of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgment. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of payment of gratuity in light of judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Verma case (supra) and in terms of Regulation 72 of the Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 expeditiously. The impugned order dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P-4) is quashed and set-aside. Needless to say, authority concerned shall do the needful strictly in terms of the directions contained in paragraph 4 of the judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Verma case (supra). 5. The parties through their respective counsel are directed to cause their presence before the authority concerned on 07.09.2026, enabling it to do the needful. 4 2026:HHC:36871

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 31,2026 (shankar)