Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2300 (HP)

KAM RAJ v. HRTC AND ORS

EX.P./291/2026 · 2026-03-10

Jiya Lal Bhardwaj

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:HHC:6539 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Execution Petition No.291 of 2026 Decided on: 10 th March, 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Kam Raj ....Petitioner Versus HRTC and others ...Respondents _____________________________________________________________________ Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the petitioner: Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral) Learned counsel for the respondents has produced a copy of the communication dated 09.03.2026, issued by the Manager (Tech), HRTC, Divisional Workshop, Taradevi, Shimla-171010. The same is taken on record. 2. A perusal of the communication reveals that the petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs.13,54,815/- and Rs.8,21,100/- towards DCRG and leave encashment. Further, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 interest of Rs.92,740/- and Rs.67,275/- towards DCRG and leave encashment has also been paid. 3. This Court, while disposing of the writ petition on 28.05.2025 8led by the petitioner, had only directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner preferably within a period of six weeks in the light of the judgment dated 17.07.2014, passed in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled Nek Ram vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has not been granted the bene8ts in terms of the judgment passed in Nek Ram’s case. 5. Since this Court had only directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, this Court cannot go into the factum as to whether the petitioner has been paid the amount or not. 6. Since the respondent-Corporation has paid the 3 amount, in case the surviving reliefs still subsist in favour of the petitioner, he is at liberty to 8le appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. 7. In view of the above, the present Execution Petition is accordingly disposed of. 10 th March, 2026 ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) (ankit) Judge