Himachal Pradesh High Court
Rajinder Kumar vs Hrtc & Another on 8 September, 2016
Bench: Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
CWP Nos. 2345, 2346, 2348, 2350
2351, 2352 & 2353 of 2016
Date of decision: 8.09.2016
.
1. CWP No.2345 of 2016
Rajinder Kumar ..Petitioner
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
2. CWP No.2346 of 2016
Mohan Singh ..Petitioner
of
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
3. CWP No.2348 of 2016
Satya Parkash
rt ..Petitioner
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
4. CWP No.2350 of 2016
Hans Raj ..Petitioner
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
5. CWP No.2351 of 2016
Rakesh Kumar ..Petitioner
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
6. CWP No.2352 of 2016
Suresh Kumar Mishra ..Petitioner
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
7. CWP No.2353 of 2016
Jagdish Chand ..Petitioner
Versus
HRTC & another . Respondents
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge
Whether approved for reporting?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:11:29 :::HCHP
2
For the petitioner(s): Mr. Shivendra Singh, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. B.N. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondents
except CWP No. 2353 of 2016.
Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocate, for the
respondents in CWP No. 2353 of 2016.
.
________________________________________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (oral)
It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner(s) that the cases of the petitioner(s) are covered by the judgment dated 03.03.2015, made by a Division Bench of this High of Court in CWP No.1555 of 2015, titled Anil Kumar Sharma versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation and another. His rt statement is taken on record.
3. Issue notice. Mr. B.N. Sharma and Mr. Raman Jamalta, Advocates, waive the same on behalf of the respondents.
4. Learned Counsel for the respondents stated at the Bar that the respondents have already released all the retiral benefits in favour of the petitioner(s) except interest.
5. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of by directing the respondents to comply with the aforesaid judgment, in letter and spirit, within a period of eight weeks from today. The judgment, supra, shall form part of this judgment also.
6. All pending applications also stand disposed of.
Copy dasti.
( Mansoor Ahmad Mir )
Chief Justice
September 8, 2016 ( Sandeep Sharma )
(tilak/sanjeev) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:11:29 :::HCHP