(Retired As Fitter From vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4486 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

               ON THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021

                            BEFORE




                                                     .

              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,

                     ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE





                               &

            HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA





               CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.5152 of 2021

      Between:- r
      PIAR CHAND
      S/O LATE SH. BARDU RAM

      R/O VILLAGE BHATERH
      POST OFFICE-SAINTHAL
      TEHSIL-JOGINDER NAGER AND
      DISTRICT MANDI H.P


      (RETIRED AS FITTER FROM
      HRTC BAIJNATH UNIT)
                                               .....PETITIONER




      (BY SH. RAKESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE)





      AND

    1. HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT





       CORPORATION (HRTC)
       THROUGH ITS, MANAGING DIRECTOR
       OLD BUS STAND SHIMLA-1.
    2. THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR-CUM-CHIEF
       ACCOUNTANT OFFICER,
       HIMACHAL PRADESH ROAD TRANSPORT
       CORPORATION AD OFFICE OLD
       BUS STAND, SHIMLA.
                                     .....RESPONDENTS




                                    ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:03:16 :::CIS
                                       2



      ( BY SH. AJAY KUMAR CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE)
    _____________________________________________________

                  This petition coming on for admission this day,




                                                           .

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath, passed the following:





                                 ORDER

The parties are ad idem that the issue in question is

no longer res integra in view of the judgment rendered by a

Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3050 of 2014, titled Nek

Ram Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others, decided on

17.07.2014.

2. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off on the

basis of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgment.

3. Consequently, the respondents are directed to pay all

retiral benefits to the petitioner within a period of six months from

today. However, it is made clear that in case the retiral benefits

are not paid to the petitioner within the aforesaid time, then in

addition to the due statutory benefits, the petitioner shall also be

paid interest at the rate of 9% per annum beyond the period of six

months till the date of payment. The pending miscellaneous

application is disposed off.

.

                                          ( Ravi Malimath )





                                        Acting Chief Justice





                                        ( Jyotsna Rewal Dua )
    September 10, 2021                         Judge
          (vt)




                    r         to