Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8788 (HP)

DESH RAJ v. THE HRTC AND ANOTHER

CWP/3734/2025 · 2025-03-18

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. 3734/2025 Decided on: 18.03.2025 Desh Raj …Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Ms. Rinkle Khoond, Advocate, vice Mr. Balwant Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Ms. Leena Guleria, learned Deputy Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:- “ (a) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing Respondent Corporation regularize services of the petitioner from his initial date of appointment and treat petitioner as on regular appointee with all consequential benefits in the interest of justice. (b) That or in alternative, the respondent corporation may kindly be directed to regularize the services of the petitioners immediately after one year, by modifying regularization order 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 Annexure P-2, with all consequential benefits in view of judgment by this Hon'ble Court in case CWPOA No. 2343 of 2020 titled as Vikram Singh versus CWPOA and others.” 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has invoked extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without even preferring any representation to the competent authority for the redresssal of his grievances raised in the writ petition. 4. Confronted with above, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be preferring a representation within two weeks from today. In case, such representation is so preferred, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within further period of six weeks. The order so passed shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 5. The instant petition is disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 18th March, 2025(rohit)