_____________________________________________________________________ vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 6074 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

_____________________________________________________________________ vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation ... on 27 May, 2025

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                               CWP No.8785 of 2025
                                         Date of Decision: 27.5.2025
_____________________________________________________________________
Mr.Balbir Singh
                                                            .........Petitioner
                                Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Anr.
                                                           .......Respondents

Coram

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

For the Petitioner:       Mr. Balwant Singh Thakur and Ms. Anchal
                          Sharma, Advocates.

For the respondents:      Mr. Raman Jamalta, 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. Raman Jamalta, 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

case 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. Pending applications, if any,

also stand disposed of.

May 27, 2025                                  (Sandeep Sharma),
     (manjit)                                        Judge