Petitioner sought regularization of service with Himachal Road Transport Corporation. Court directed respondents to decide the case in light of a cited precedent without examining merits.
Respondents to decide petitioner's case in light of cited judgment within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 397/2024 Decided on: 10.12.2024
Brij Lal …Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner:
Mr. Sat Prakash, Advocate.
For the respondents:
Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J
Notice. Mr. Raman Jamalta, learned counsel, accepts
notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the grant of following
substantive reliefs:-
“(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to regularise the service of petitioner from initial date of appointment i.e. w.e.f. 07.10.2005 with all consequential benefits.
(ii) That or in alternative the respondent corporation may kindly be directed to regularise the services of the petitioner immediately after one year i.e. in 2005 by modifying regularization order dated 16.01.2023 with all consequential benefits.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
reliefs prayed for by the petitioner are covered by the decision
1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
rendered in Vikram Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation2 alongwith other connected matters. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the case of the petitioner is considered and decided by the respondents in light of the aforesaid judgment. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to this prayer.
4. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, the instant petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge
10th December, 2024(rohit)
2CWPOA No. 2343 of 2020 decided on 09.11.2023,
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition should be decided by respondents in light of the judgment in Vikram Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vikram Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport CorporationReferred¶20
Vikram Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation
Brij Lal
Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
