IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.2848 of 2026 Decided on 12th March, 2026 Rajesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Issue notice. Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. In the light of the averments made in the petition and further in the light of the fact that the petitioner is stated to be superannuating within two years and has aged mother to look after, who is stated to be blind, this petition is disposed of with the direction that in the event of the petitioner filing a representation for his adjustment at some other convenient station within a period of one week from today, let the same 2 be considered and decided by the Authority within a period of two weeks as from the date of the receipt thereof. Till then, the order under challenge shall not be given effect and the petitioner shall be allowed to continue to work at Dharampur Unit of the respondent-Corporation, as none has been posted in his place. 3. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge March 12, 2026 (Vinod)