IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10418 of 2023 Decided on: 11th August, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajinder Kumar …..Petitioner Versus Union of India and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Shashi Shirshoo, Central Govt. Counsel, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Kulwant Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in this matter on 24.07.2025:- “Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has placed on record copy of the order dated 28.11.2024 issued by the Ministry of Labour & Employment, Government of India and on that basis submits that during the pendency of the petition, respondent No.1 has referred the dispute raised by the petitioner with respect to the alleged illegal termination of his services to the learned Labour Court-cum-Industrial Tribunal, Chandigarh. However, while referring the dispute, the petitioner's particulars have been incorrectly mentioned, inasmuch as he has been shown to be the son of late Shri Atul Ram, whereas he is the son of Shri Roshan 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Lal. The aforesaid particulars are required to be corrected and fresh order is required to be passed by respondent No.1. Let learned counsel for respondent No.1 obtain necessary instructions and come with the fresh order with corrected particulars of the petitioner on the next date. List on 11.08.2025, failing which respondent No.2 shall remain present in the Court.” 2. Pursuant thereto, learned Central Government Counsel appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 has placed on record copy of corrigendum dated 28.07.2025, rectifying the errors in the particulars of the petitioner in the previous reference. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s grievances raised in this writ petition now stand redressed. In view of above, the writ petition to stand disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua August 11, 2025 Judge Mukesh