_____________________________________________________________________ vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 191 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_____________________________________________________________________ vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation ... on 1 May, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                               CWP No.6899 of 2025
                                          Date of Decision: 1.5.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Ramesh Chand
                                                           .........Petitioner
                                Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Anr.
                                                          .......Respondents

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner:       Ms. Divya Rajta, Advocate.

For the respondents:      Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashishat, Advocate.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on

instructions, states that the petitioner would be content and satisfied

in case directions are issued to the respondents to consider and decide

his case in light of judgment dated 9.11.2023, passed by Division

Bench of this Court in CWPOA No. 2343 of 2020, titled Vikram

Singh v. Himachal Road Transport Corporation (alongwith

connected matters), in a time bound manner.

2. Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashishat, Advocate, while putting in

appearance on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that he is not

averse to aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without

going into the merits of the case deems it fit to dispose of the present

petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the

representation (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner in light of aforesaid

judgment expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks.

Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing

the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon. Liberty

is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in

appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending

applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

May 1, 2025                                     (Sandeep Sharma),
     (manjit)                                          Judge