Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18187 (HP)

RAJINDER KUMAR v. HRTC AND OTHERS

CWP/10262/2025 · 2025-06-26

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10262/2025 Decided on: 26.06.2025 Rajinder Kumar …Petitioner Versus HRTC & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rahul Gathania, Advocate. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Rahul Gathania, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs: - “(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued to respondent to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner Annexure P-11 in a time bound manner; (ii) That a writ in nature of mandamus may kindly be issued to respondent directed them to regularized the services of the petitioner after completion of one year from the initial appointment as held in 2002 in the light of judgment passed in CWPOA No. 2343 of 2020. (iii) That the respondent may kindly be directed to release the arrears accrued thereupon after regularization from due date.” 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved and the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner have already been adjudicated in Vikram Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation2. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content, if the case of the petitioner, is considered by the respondents, in light of the aforesaid judgment within a time- bound schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, the instant petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 26th June, 2025(rohit) 2 1CWPOA No. 2343 of 2020 decided on 09.11.2023.