Nagar vs Lekh Ram Etc. Etc.
2021 Latest Caselaw 4655 HP

                                 1


    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
           ON THE 22nd 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.5819 of 2021

        Between:-





        SH. SUSHIL KUMAR,
        S/O LATE SH. BIHARI LAL,
        R/O VILLAGE & POST OFFICE
        AHJU, TEHSIL JOGINDER

        NAGAR, DISTRICT MANDI (H.P.),

        PRESENTLY WORKING AS
        CONDUCTOR, HIMACHAL ROAD
        TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
        KULLU, DISTRICT KULLU (H.P.).                     ....PETITIONER



        (BY SH. RAKESH KUMAR DOGRA,
        ADVOCATE)




        AND





        HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT
        CORPORATION,
        THROUGH ITS MANAGING





        DIRECTOR,
        SHIMLA-171003 (H.P.).                          ....RESPONDENT

        (BY MS. SHUBH MAHAJAN,
        ADVOCATE)
    ______________________________________________________

               This Civil Writ Petition coming on for admission this day,

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




                                              ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:06:35 :::CIS
                                     2


                               ORDER

Notice. Ms. Shubh Mahajan, learned Standing Counsel,

takes notice on behalf of the respondent.

.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the issue

raised in the instant petition is squarely covered by the judgment

rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.1557-

1564 of 2019, titled as Himachal Road Transport Corporation versus

Lekh Ram Etc. Etc., decided on 08.02.2019 (Annexure P-3). This is

3. to a matter to be considered and decided by the employer.

In view of the nature of the order we propose to pass,

there is no need to call upon the respondent to file the reply.

4. Accordingly, without going into the merit of the case, the

petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent to consider

and decide the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid

judgment. In case, the same is found to be covered with the

aforesaid judgment, then the same and similar benefit be extended

to the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from today.

                                                    ( Ravi Malimath )
                                                   Acting Chief Justice




                                                  ( Jyotsna Rewal Dua )
          September 22, 2021                            Judge
               (Yashwant)