Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15914 (HP)

ARJUN SINGH v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/9366/2025 · 2025-06-05

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. 9366/2025 Decided on: 05.06.2025 Arjun Singh …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Thakur and Ms. Aprajita, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. The petitioner is serving as Forest Guard at Gulling beat under Wildlife Range Tabo, Wildlife Division Spiti at Kaza, H.P. His grievance is that on completion of requisite tenure at the aforesaid 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 hard/tribal area, he preferred a representation on 22.04.2025 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2/competent authority seeking his transfer to soft area, in accordance with law and in terms of applicable transfer policy, however, the said representation has not been decided till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be content in case, he is permitted to submit a fresh representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, whereafter, the said respondent/competent authority, be directed to decide the representation to be made by him, in a time bound manner. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 4. Having regard to the afore-submissions, but without examining the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, within a period of two weeks from today, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law and in terms of applicable transfer policy, within a further period of four weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge June 05, 2025(rohit)