IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.868 of 2024 Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 _______________________________________________________ Nitin Thakur …….Petitioner Versus C.Paulrasu & Ors. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. C.N.Singh and Dr. Nidhi, Advocates. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondent-State. Mr. K.S. Gill, Advocate, for respondent No. 4. ____________________________________________________ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge While referring to the reply filed by the respondents, it is stated that though on account of closure of project, no work is available, but yet services of the petitioner have not been terminated and as such, it is wrong for the petitioner to say that his services have been terminated. It is further stated that since project is closed and no funds are available, it may not be possible to release the salary, but since similar issue is pending adjudication before this Court in bunch of petitions, which have now been finally heard & reserved on 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 20.08.2025, case at hand can be disposed of with the observation that same shall abide by the final outcome of cases i.e. Nitin Thakur Vs. State of H.P. & Ors.2 2. Having taken note of the fact that services of the petitioner have not been terminated as is claimed by the respondents coupled with the fact that cases involving similar dispute stood finally heard & judgment reserved, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive and accordingly, the same is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file afresh, if required after disposal of main petition. Notice issued to he respondents are discharged. p Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 8th September, 2025 (rohit) 2 CWP No. 4971/2024