IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10349 of 2025 a/w connected matters Decided on: 28th June, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. CWP No.10349 of 2025 Ajmer Singh …..Petitioner Versus HRTC and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.10384 of 2025 Sushil Kumar …..Petitioner Versus HRTC and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.10389 of 2025 Rajinder Singh …..Petitioner Versus HRTC and another .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Raditya Katoch, Advocate vice Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Raditya Katoch, Advocate vice Mr. Raman Jamalta, learned Standing Counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. All these writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost identical reliefs. The substantive reliefs in CWP No.10349 of 2025 read as under:- “i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner from his initial date of appointment i.e. w.e.f. 27-10-2005, with all consequential benefits, alongwith upto date interest. ii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to decide the representation dated 23-12-2024 i.e. Annexure P-4 within time bound manner in the interest of justice and fair play. iii) That or in alternative, the respondent corporation may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner immediately after one year i.e. in 2006, by modifying regularization order dated 06-03-2013 with all consequential benefits.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved and the reliefs prayed for by the petitioners have already been adjudicated in Vikram Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would be content if the respective cases of the petitioners are considered by the respondents in light of the aforesaid 2 CWPOA No.2343 of 2020, decided alongwith connected matters on 09.11.2023. 3 judgment. Learned vice counsel appearing for the respondents has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions, but without examining the merits of the matters, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the respective cases of the petitioners in light of the aforesaid judgment and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioners. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua June 28, 2025 Judge Mukesh