IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.16690 of 2024
Decided on: 31st December, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yadvinder Kumar …..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and others .....Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Balwinder Singh, Deputy Advocate
General, for respondents No.1 to 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice confined to respondents No.1 to 3, which
is waived by Mr. Balwinder Singh, learned Deputy Advocate
General.
2. Petitioner’s grievance is that while adjusting one
Sh. Hem Raj in view of judgment dated 21.10.2024 passed
in CWP No.2746 of 2024 (Hem Raj Versus State of H.P. and
others), the petitioner has been transferred from GSSS
Dhangiara, District Mandi to GSSS Lohara, District Mandi.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
1
Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2
petitioner was posted at Dhangiara, District Mandi only on
09.12.2024. Learned counsel also submits that private
respondent No.4-Smt. Chinta Mani has already joined at
GSSS Dhangiara, District Mandi, i.e. the place earlier
occupied by the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that in view of the above facts, the petitioner is
ready and willing to submit a representation to respondent
No.2 for his suitable adjustment to some other place as he
has been wrongly shifted by the respondents from GSSS
Dhangiara, District Mandi to GSSS Lohara, District Mandi
in order to accommodate Smt. Chintamani (respondent
No.4) & Sh. Hem Raj and respondent No.2/competent
authority be directed to decide the representation to be
preferred by the petitioner within a time bound schedule.
Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this
prayer.
4. Looking into the nature of the grievance raised
by the petitioner and having regarding to the submissions
made by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is
disposed of by permitting the petitioner to furnish a
representation to respondent No.2/competent authority
within a period of one week from today, which in turn, shall
3
be considered and decided by respondent No.2/competent
authority in accordance with law and applicable policy
keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, within a
period of two weeks thereafter. The decision so arrived at
shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above
terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if
any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
December 31, 2024 Judge
Mukesh