Himachal Pradesh High Court
EX.P./2277/2026 of RAJ KUMAR Vs THE HRTC AND OTHERS on 28 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Execution Petition No. 2277 of 2026 Date of Decision: 28.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Raj Kumar …….Petitioner Versus Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr. … Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Execution Petition No. 2277 of 2026 Date of Decision: 28.09.2026 _______________________________________________________ Raj Kumar
…….Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Road Transport Corporation & Anr.
… Respondents ______________________________________________________
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Raman Parashar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):
While placing on record communication dated 28.09.2026, issued under signatures of Deputy Divisional Manager (HQ), HRTC Head Office, Shimla, Mr. Rahul Thakur, learned counsel representing the respondent-Corporation, states that sums of Rs.18,41,598/- and Rs.11,36,000/- stand paid to the petitioner on account of DCRG and leave encashment vide cheques No. 803107 and 515051 dated 19.06.2026 and 26.08.2026, respectively. He states that remaining amount shall be paid within a period of two weeks.
2. In view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the instant petition and accordingly, same is disposed of with a direction the respondent-Corporation to ensure that remaining amount is paid to the petitioner within a period of two weeks, failing which, 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2
petitioner would be at liberty to get the present petition revived, so that appropriate action in accordance with law is taken towards the attachment of the property of the department as well as salary of the erring official.
(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge September 28,2026 (shankar)