Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 780 (HP)

Himachal Road Transport Corporation v. Veena Kumari

2014-06-21

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR, TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2014
JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice. CMP (M) No. 313/2012 By the medium of this limitation petition, the appellants/applicants have sought condonation of 119 days’ delay, which has crept-in in filing the appeal. 2. Heard. We have gone through the application and the appeal. We are of the considered view that the appellants/applicants have carved out sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Thus, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application is disposed of. LPA No. 73/2012 3. The LPA is taken on Board. 4. Issue notice. Mr. Mehar Chand, Advocate waives notice on behalf of the respondents. 5. At this stage, learned Counsel for the respondents stated at the Bar that this matter is covered by the judgment delivered by this Court in LPA No. 680/2011, titled as Himachal Road Transport Corporation & others versus Devi Singh-II, on 31.05.2014. His statement is taken on record. 6. Keeping in view the averments contained in this appeal read with the judgment passed in LPA No. 680/2011, this appeal is dismissed. The appellants are directed to release all the service benefits i.e. salary and retrial benefits within three months. In default, the appellants shall be liable to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date the same was due to the writ petitioners/respondents. 7. Pending applications stand disposed of.