Disposed

Jaswinder Singh @ Jasbinder Singh v. Hrtc and Another

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026CWP/2113/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought regularization of service from 10.07.2000 with arrears and interest. Respondents regularized him from 28.10.2006 but did not pay arrears. Relying on a coordinate bench order in Prakash Chand v. HRTC (CWP 4944/2021) and Vipan Kumar v. HRTC (CWP 4068/2023), the court disposed of the petition by granting six months to pay the entire arrears, failing which interest at 7.5% per annum would accrue from the date of the order sought to be executed.

What did the court decide?

Six months granted to respondents to pay entire arrears to petitioner; failing which, interest at 7.5% per annum from date of order sought to be executed.

Jaswinder Singh @ Jasbinder Singh… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No.2113 of 2023

¶3

Decided on: 15^th September, 2026

¶4

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jaswinder Singh @ Jasbinder Singh …..Petitioner

Versus

HRTC and another

.....Respondents

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶9

Coram

¶10

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶11

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶12

For the Petitioner: Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Shubh Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Naresh Mahajan, Advocate.

¶13

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶14

Even though the respondents have not filed reply, however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

¶15

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for granting him regular status w.e.f. 10.07.2000 alongwith all consequential benefits including interest on the basis of decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in

¶16

Himachal Road Transport Corporation Versus Lekh

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

Ram Etc. Etc.² . Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the filing of the writ petition, the respondents have passed office orders on 08.12.2023, regularizing the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 28.10.2006 instead of 19.07.2014 alongwith seniority and consequential/terminal benefits. Copies of these office orders have been placed on record.

¶20

3. The surviving grievance of the petitioner now is that arrears have not been paid to him in terms of the above office orders. Learned counsel further submitted that in a similar situation, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.07.2022 passed in CWP No.4944 of 2021 (Prakash Chand Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation), has granted six months’ time to the respondent-Corporation to pay the entire arrears to the employee. He further submitted that similar order be passed in the instant case as well. Operative part of the order dated 15.07.2022 reads as under:-

¶21

“Taking cue from the order passed by learned Single Judge of this Court on 01.07.2022, in Execution Petition (Tribunal) No.386 of 2020, titled Gopal Krishan Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation, we deem it appropriate to grant six months time to the respondent to pay entire arrears to the petitioner, failing which, the respondent shall be liable to pay interest @ 7.5% from

¶22

2 Civil Appeal Nos.1557-1564 of 2019, decided on 08.02.2019

¶23

¶24

the date of passing of the order sought to be executed. Ordered accordingly.”

¶25

4. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem

¶26

that similar issue was also involved in Vipan Kumar Versus HRTC and another³ , which was decided as under:-

¶27

“4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by granting six months’ time to the respondents to pay the entire arrears to the petitioner, failing which the respondents shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of passing of the order sought to be executed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶28

5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by granting six months’ time to the respondents to pay the entire arrears to the petitioner, failing which the respondents shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of passing of the order sought to be executed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶29

Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 15, 2026 Judge Mukesh

¶30

3 CWP No.4068 of 2023, decided on 10.08.2023

Jaswinder Singh @ Jasbinder Singh v. Hrtc and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswinder Singh @ Jasbinder Singh v. Hrtc and Another

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