IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4487 of 2025 Date of Decision: 04.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ Naresh Ranaut …….Petitioner Versus HRTC & Ors. … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Dogra, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main reliefs:- “(i) That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to allow the benefit of past approved military service of 24 years towards fixation of pay of the petitioner w.e.f. 11.11.2020 with all consequential benefits including arrears along with interest @ 9% per annum, as the same benefit has already been allowed to one Shri Surjeet Kumar Rana, who has been appointed as Conductor on regular basis w.e.f 26.11.2021 and presently posted at HRTC, Rampur and justice be done. (ii) To grant to the petitioner such other consequential reliefs, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in facts and circumstances of the matter.” 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Though this Court has granted time to the respondents to file reply, but during proceedings of the case, Mr. Raman Jamalta, learned counsel representing the respondents, while placing on record communication dated nil issued under the signatures of Executive Director, HRTC, Shimla, states that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment dated 28.04.2025 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 11982 of 2024, titled as Dilbag Singh Vs. HRTC & others. He states that since respondent- Corporation already implemented the aforesaid judgment, respondent-Corporation is allowing the benefit to the petitioner under the provisions of Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel Amended Rules on the analogy of Dilbag Singh’s case. 3. Having perused aforesaid communication, which is taken on record, this Court finds merit in the contention of Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate. 4. In view of the above, this Court is persuaded to agree with Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate that relief, as prayed for in the instant proceedings, stands granted to the petitioner, which fact has been fairly acknowledged by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. However, respondents are directed to ensure that consequential benefits, if any, 3 flowing from the aforesaid judgment are released to the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within six weeks. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 04, 2025 (Sunil)