Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29624 (HP)

ANUJ KUMAR v. THE HRTC AND ANOTHER

CWP/16812/2025 · 2025-10-30

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.16812 of 2025 Decided on: 30th October, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anuj Kumar …..Petitioner Versus HRTC & Anr .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rahul Thakur, learned counsel accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner’s case is that he has served in the respondent-HRTC w.e.f. 06.06.2011 to 19.11.2024. He tendered his resignation from the respondent-Corporation on 19.11.2024. That was accepted on 20.11.2024, whereafter, he was employed in the State Education Department. Petitioner’s grievance is that there are still some outstanding dues from his service rendered in the respondent-corporation viz Night Over Time allowance, 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 GPF, Compensatory Leave benefits, Leave Encashment, Earned Leave benefits, Pay Commission arrear and DA arrears are due to be paid to him by the respondent- Corporation and despite repeated representations, the same have not been cleared. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has lastly represented on 22.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) to the respondent-corporation, requesting for clearing his pending dues. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case respondents / competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned counsel for the respondents is not averse to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondents / competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. The dues payable to the petitioner for the service rendered by him in the respondent-corporation be paid to him within the aforesaid 3 period. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 30, 2025 Judge R.Atal