JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, J. The only question involved in this case is whether the petitioner is entitled to pension or not. The case of the petitioner has been rejected only on the ground that since he was regularized w.e.f. 1.1.1995 and retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.5.2003, he had only completed 8 years and 5 months service and had not rendered 10 years service and as such due to lack of requisite qualifying service he is not entitled for pension. The admitted case was that the petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis some time in the year 1985 and on completion of 10 years service on daily wage basis was regularized w.e.f. 1.1.1995. In State of HP & others Vs. Sarab Dayal, Latest HLJ 2007 (HP) 1292 this Court held that 50% of the service rendered on daily wage basis has to be taken into consideration for purpose of considering qualifying service and pension payable under the rules. Since the petitioner had served for 10 years on daily wage basis, 5 years service has to be counted toward reckoning the qualifying service. Therefore for purpose of qualifying service and calculation of pension, the petitioner shall be deemed to have served for 13 years and 5 months. In view of the above discussion, the petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to grant pension to the petitioner by treating his service by 13 years and 5 months. The arrears of pension alongwith interest @ 6% per annum be paid to the petitioner latest by 31st August, 2011, failing which the State shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum. The future pension shall also be finalized on or before the said date. Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.