Allowed

Subhash Kumar v. the Hrtc and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026CWP/15996/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge of Himachal Pradesh decided four writ petitions filed by retired employees of HRTC. The Court directed the respondents to pay remaining retiral benefits and gratuity along with 9% interest within six months.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to pay remaining retiral benefits and gratuity along with 9% interest within six months from the date of the order.

Subhash Kumar Vs the Hrtc and Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.15968 of 2026 alongwith connected matters

¶2

Decided on: 15 ---------------------------------------------------------	^thSeptember, 2026 ----------------------------
1. CWP No.15968 of 2026
Gian Chand and others	…..Petitioners
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another	.....Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------- 2. CWP No.15970 of 2026	----------------------------
Tek Chand	…..Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another	.....Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------- 3. CWP No.15991 of 2026	----------------------------
Yashwant Singh	…..Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another	.....Respondents
--------------------------------------------------------- 4. CWP No.15996 of 2026	---------------------------
Subhash Kumar	…..Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and others ---------------------------------------------------------	.....Respondents ----------------------------

¶3

¶4

Coram

¶5

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the Petitioners: Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocates, in CWP Nos.15968 & 15970 of 2026.

¶8

Mr. Arun Mehta, Advocate, in CWP No.15991 of 2026.

¶9

Mr. Hitesh Khajuria, Advocate, in CWP No.15996 of 2026.

¶10

For the Respondents: Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Advocate, in CWP Nos.15968 & 15970 of 2026.

¶11

Ms. Shrutika Chauhan, Advocate, in CWP No.15991 of 2026.

¶12

Mr. Abhishek Thakur, Advocate, in CWP No.15996 of 2026.

¶13

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶14

Notice. Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Ms. Shrutika Chauhan and Mr. Abhishek Thakur, learned counsel, appear and waive service of notice on behalf of the respondents in the respective petitions.

¶15

2. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners, who had retired from the service of the respondent–Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC), with the prayer that the respondents may be directed to pay

¶16

1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

¶17

¶18

the amount of retiral benefits alongwith interest for the delay on part of the respondents.

¶19

3. Reliance has been placed on the judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.3050 of 2014 , titled Nek Ram versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others , decided on 17.07.2014 and also on a subsequent order of this Court dated 25.08.2021, passed in CWP No.4377 of 2021 , titled Sh. Subhash Chand versus

¶20

The Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Shimla

¶21

and others alongwith connected matters , in which, the respondents were directed to pay the retiral benefits to the petitioners within a period of six months. In case the required retiral benefits are not paid to the petitioners within the aforesaid period of six months, then in addition to the due statutory benefits, the petitioners shall also be paid interest at the rate of 9% per annum beyond the period of six months till the date of actual payment.

¶22

4. In another subsequent order of this Court passed in CWP No.6034 of 2021 , titled Ram Lal versus The Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. and another and the connected matter , decided on 23.11.2021, the respondents were directed to make payment of gratuity to the petitioners

¶23

¶24

within a period of six months from the date of passing of the order. In the event of non-payment of due amount, the petitioners were held entitled to differential amount of interest between the amount of interest statutorily payable to the petitioners as per the Payment of Gratuity Act and the interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the period of delay beyond six months.

¶25

5. While disposing of Review Petition No.110 of 2021 on 25.11.2021, preferred against the order dated 09.11.2021 passed in CWP No.6928 of 2021, in which, the aforesaid order dated 25.08.2021 passed in CWP No.4377 of 2021 was relied upon, this Court has clarified the aforesaid order in the terms that the respondentCorporation therein shall be liable to pay entire retiral dues of the petitioner, including gratuity, arrears of pension and leave encashment alongwith prescribed rate of interest, within a period of six months from the due date till the actual payment is made.

¶26

In view of above, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay the amount of remaining retiral benefits to the petitioners with actual rate of interest as per applicable rules till the time of actual payment, which shall be paid to them within a

¶27

¶28

period of six months from today. The due amount of payment, if delayed beyond six months, shall be paid with interest at the rate of 9% per annum till the date of its actual payment. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶29

September 15, 2026 Mukesh

¶30

Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge

Subhash Kumar v. the Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Kumar v. the Hrtc and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases