Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35117 (HP)

RAJINDER PAL v. NIPUN JINDAL AND ANR

COPC/1357/2025 · 2025-12-15

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.1357 of 2025 Date of Decision: 15.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Rajinder Pal …….Petitioner Versus Nipun Jindal & Another … Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): While placing on record communication dated 12.12.2025, issued under the signatures of Regional Manager, Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Rampur, Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, learned counsel representing the respondents, states that mandate contained in the judgment alleged to have been violated stands duly complied with. 2. Having perused the aforesaid communication, which is taken on record, this Court finds that sums of Rs.11,00,274/- and Rs.4, 34, 357/- have been paid to the petitioner, vide cheque No.352439, dated 07.11.2025 towards DCRG and leave encashment. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner fairly states that save and except interest, if any, on the delayed payment, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant petition. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 4. Learned counsel representing the respondents fairly states that interest, if any, on the delayed payment shall be paid expeditiously. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant petition and accordingly, same is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to ensure that interest on the delayed payment is paid expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks, failing which, petitioner would be at liberty to get the present proceedings revived, so that appropriate action, in accordance with law, is taken against the erring officials. Notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged accordingly. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 15, 2025 (shankar)