Himachal Pradesh High Court
COPC/1030/2026 of JAGDISH CHAND Vs NIPUN JINDAL AND ANOTHER on 5 August 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA COPC No. 1030 of 2026 Date of decision: 05.08.2026. Jagdish Chand ...Petitioner. Versus Nipun Jindal & another ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner :
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.
2026:HHC:32747
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
COPC No. 1030 of 2026
Date of decision: 05.08.2026. Jagdish Chand
...Petitioner.
Versus
Nipun Jindal & another
...Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Advocate.
Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):
The present petition has been filed alleging non compliance of the judgment as passed by this Court in CWP No. 4552 of 2026 dated 16.04.2026.
2. The learned counsel for the respondents was directed to obtain instructions. He has placed on record office order dated 05.08.2026, whereby it has been ordered that considering the factual matrix in the case along with relevant rules and judicial precedence, it can be concluded that the petitioner fulfills all the requisite criteria for grant of pensionery and other retiral benefits as per CCS Pension Rules, 1972 and CCS, Leave Rules 1972. The Finance and Pension Branches of
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
the Corporation has been directed to do the needful in terms of release of such benefits to the petitioner.
3. The respondents are directed to do the needful within a period of twelve weeks from today.
4. Since the judgment passed by this Court stands fully satisfied, nothing remains for adjudication in the instant petition and the same is closed. However, liberty reserved to the petitioner to revive the petition by filing appropriate application, in case any of his grievance still remains unredressed.
5. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of with liberty as aforesaid along with pending applications, if any.
(Romesh Verma)
Judge 5th August, 2026. (kck)