Disposed¶11

Hem Raj v. Nipun Jindal and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC6 May 2026COPC/436/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hem Raj v. Nipun Jindal & another, COPC No.436 of 2026, HP High Court Shimla, decided 06.05.2026 (Romesh Verma J.). Non-compliance petition against judgment in CWP No.9506 of 2024 dated 07.07.2025 re leave encashment Rs.8,37,500/- and DCRG Rs.8,25,937 payable by HRTC; payment reported vide cheque dated 07.11.2025 with undertaking to pay interest within three weeks; petition closed, notice discharged, liberty to revive.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed and notice discharged after respondents reported payment of leave encashment of Rs.8,37,500/- and DCRG of Rs.8,25,937 vide cheque dated 07.11.2025 and undertook to pay interest within three weeks; petitioner left at liberty to revive the petition if his grievance remains unaddressed. ¶11

Hem Raj Vs Nipun Jindal and Another — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No.436 of 2026 Decided on: 06.05.2026

¶2

Hem Raj	….Petitioner
Versus
Nipun Jindal & another	...Respondents

¶3

Coram

¶4

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge Whether approved for reporting?

¶5

For the petitioner:	Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondents:	Ms. Shrutika Chauhan, Advocate, vice
	Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashisht, Advocate.

¶6

Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral)

¶7

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging non-compliance of the judgment as passed by this Court in CWP No.9506 of 2024, dated 07.07.2025.

¶8

Ms. Shrutika Chauhan, learned counsel, has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents. She has placed on record a copy of communication, as issued by the Deputy Divisional Manager, HRTC, Bilaspur addressed to the Managing Director, HRTC, Shimla, and stated that the leave encashment payment amounting to Rs.8,37,500/- (Rupees eight Lacs thirty seven thousand five hundred only) and DCRG amounting to Rs.8,25,937 (Rupees eight lacs twenty five thousand nine

¶9

¶10

hundred thirty seven) has been paid to the present petitioner vide cheque dated 07.11.2025. She further submits that the respondents undertake to pay the amount of interest within a period of three weeks from today positively.

¶11

In view of statement of learned counsel for the respondents, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present petition and the same is accordingly closed. Notice discharged. 4. Needless to say that in case the grievance of the petitioner still remain unaddressed, in that event, he shall be at liberty to revive the present petition.

¶12

( Romesh Verma ) Judge

¶13

May 06, 2026 (vt)

Hem Raj v. Nipun Jindal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hem Raj v. Nipun Jindal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rishi Kant Sharma Vs Kamran Rizvi and Others

Radha Devi and Others Vs Gangi Devi and Another

NHAI Vs Baldev Singh and Ors.

Rohini and Another Vs Ravi Shankar

Babu Ram and Anr. Vs Mandir Bhagwati Devi and Anr.

Balbir Singh and Another Vs Nipun Jindal and Another