Vikas Kumar vs Himachal Road Transport ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 17101 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8113 of 2023 Date of Decision: 30.10.2023 _______________________________________________________

.

    Vikas Kumar                                  .......Petitioner





                             Versus
    Himachal Road Transport Corporation        ... Respondent

_______________________________________________________

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Piyush Agnihotri, Proxy Counsel vice Mr. Dheeraj Kanwar, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Mohar Singh, Proxy Counsel vice Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, Advocate.

__________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

Learned counsel representing the petitioner states that

his client would be content and satisfied in case directions are issued

to the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in

light of judgments dated 29.10.2014 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court in CWP No.2570 of 2013, titled Lekh Ram vs. Himachal

Road Transport Corporation, judgment dated 7.09.2021 passed by

this Court in CWPOA No.4442 of 2019, titled Yashwant Dev

Bhardwaj and others vs. HP University Summer Hill, Shimla and

others and judgment dated 3.8.2023 passed by Division Bench of this

Court in CWP No.2004 of 2017, titled Sh. Taj Mohammad and

others vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh and others alongwith

Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

connected matter, in a time bound manner. Learned Proxy Counsel

representing the respondent is not averse to aforesaid innocuous

prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

.

2. Having perused the averments contained in the petition

as well as relief prayed therein vis-à-vis judgments sought to be relied

upon, this Court finds that the issue raised in the instant petition

already stands adjudicated by Division Bench as well as this Court in

the aforesaid judgments and as such, no prejudice, if any, would be

caused to either of the parties, if the respondent is directed to

consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of judgments

supra.

3. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition

is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider and

decide the case of the petitioner in light of aforesaid judgments supra

expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Needless to

say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant

order shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and

pass detailed speaking order thereupon. Liberty is reserved to the

petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate Court of law, if

he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands

disposed of.

4. List for compliance on 22.12.2023.

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 30, 2023

.

         (shankar)






                         r             to