IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12895 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Mukesh Thakur …….Petitioner Versus MD, HRTC, Shimla & Anr. … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Nimish Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Nimish Gupta, learned Counsel representing the petitioner, is that application dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-2), praying therein for appointment on compassionate ground is not being decided by the respondents, despite repeated requests. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vinod K.Gupta, Advocate. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Father of the petitioner, who was working as Conductor in the respondent-department, died on 17.12.2022, while in service. Though vide application dated 13.06.2023 (Annexure P-2), petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground, but till date no decision has been taken upon the same, as a result thereof, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide the application (Annexure P-2) in a time bound manner. Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents, states that application filed by the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 4. Consequently, in view of aforesaid stand adopted by learned counsel representing the respondents, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to ensure that final decision upon the application dated 13.06.2013 (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner, if not already taken, is taken expeditiously, preferably within four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders taking note of Policy, which 3 was in vogue at the time of death of the father of the petitioner. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 21, 2025 (Sunil)