Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13277 (HP)

RAM KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/7202/2025 · 2025-05-02

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7202/2025 Decided on: 02.05.2025 Ram Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Ms. Leena Guleria, learned Deputy Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. In view of the order being passed hereinafter, reply is not required to be called from respondents No.1 to 3 and notice is also not required to be issued to respondent No.4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is presently serving as Peon at Government Senior Secondary School Chandni, District Sirmaur. His grievance is to the order dated 28.04.2025, wherein he has been transferred to 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 Government Senior Secondary School Kathwar, District Sirmour vice respondent No.4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Class-IV employee, who has been transferred at the instance of private respondent No.4 on political consideration. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has been transferred to a station, which is about 40 kms away from his native place. To a query, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has completed his normal tenure at the present place of posting, he, however, submitted that petitioner is facing certain circumstances, therefore, he be permitted to prefer a representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, whereafter the said respondent be directed to consider and decide the same within time bound schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to above submissions and without interfering with transfer of respondent No.4 at Government Senior Secondary School Chandni, District Sirmaur, the instant writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, within a period of three days from today, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within a further period of one week. The order 3 so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 2nd May, 2025(rohit)