IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15284 of 2025 Date of decision : 22.09.2025. Suman Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation & others ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral): Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court on 17.07.2014 in CWP No. 3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram vs. State of H.P. & others. He further submits that the petitioner has already made a representation to the competent authority on 10.09.2025 and he shall be satisfied at this stage in case, time bound directions are issued to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in terms of the judgment in Nek Ram (supra). The prayer being innocuous is allowed without adverting to the merits of the case. Respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner Annexure P-1 within 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2-( 2025:HHC:33026 ) eight weeks from today in terms of the judgment in Nek Ram (supra) by passing a reasoned and detailed order. Petition is accordingly disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) 22nd September, 2025 Judge (veena)