Welfare State Must Be Impartial, Cannot Be "Touchy" When Employees Approach Court For Rightful Claim: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has extended the retirement age of a government college professor, and held that a welfare State is expected to act fairly and without bias, and can't penalise an employee merely because she approached the Court for enforcement of her lawful rights.

Noting the conduct of college Justice Sandeep Sharma remarked that: “State being 'welfare State' is expected to work impartially without there being any bias, but it seems that the respondents have become very touchy about the action of petitioner in as much as she approached this court, for her rightful claim”.

Background Facts:

The petitioner was initially appointed as an Associate Professor at Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla. In 2016, the state decided to open new Government Medical Colleges.

Thereafter, the petitioner was transferred to one of the new colleges, and the Government issued policy notifications stating that all faculty members who would transfer to new colleges would be given incentives, including promotion, pay benefits, and a higher retirement age.

Despite being eligible for a higher retirement age, the state issued an order retiring the petitioner at the age of 62. This order was stayed by the High Court on 29.03.2022. However, during the pendency of the petition, the state passed another order retiring her at the age of 65 years without permission of the Court.

The Court remarked that it is true that extension in service cannot be claimed as a matter of right; rather, it shall be considered on a case-by-case basis. However, a distinction cannot be made between two employees at similar positions without any justifiable reasons.

After going through the contentions of the college, the court found no justifiable reason to deny the extension of service to the petitioner, as her conduct didn't show that she failed to perform her duties to the satisfaction of the employer.

Further, the Court noted that last year the State Government was cautioned by the National Medical Commission regarding the overall faculty deficiency and imposed a penalty of Rs 12 lakh on every Government medical college for faculty deficiency, but the State Government did not learn its lesson.

It remarked that due to a shortage of teaching faculty, it is not just the public at large that suffers, but also the students studying in such colleges, who may not get NOCs for further applying to PG super specialist courses.

Thus, the court allowed the petition and directed the college to extend the service of the petitioner up to the age of 68 years.

Case Name: Susheela Rana V/s State of H.P & Ors.

Case No.: CWP No. 1743 of 2022

Date of Decision: 04.08.2025

For the Petitioner: Mr. C.N. Singh, Dr. Nidhi Singh and Mr. Anshul Gandhi, Advocates.

For the Respondents: Mr. Anoop Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General & Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4/State.

Click Here To Read/Download Order