Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18682 (HP)

BHAGAT RAM v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/10398/2025 · 2025-06-28

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. 10398/2025 Decided on: 28.06.2025 Bhagat Ram …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Kumar Shashwat and Mr. Dixit Sahotra, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner is serving as Veterinary Pharmacist at Veterinary Hospital Himgiri, District Chamba. Under office order dated 20.06.2025, he has been transferred to Veterinary Dispensary Chanju Mehla District Chamba vice Sh. Parmesh Kumar. Petitioner has grievance to the said office order. Sh. Parmesh Kumar, Veterinary 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 Pharmacist, has not been impleaded as respondent in the array of parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though petitioner has completed his normal tenure at the present place of posting, however, he is facing adverse family circumstance, inasmuch as his wife is in advance stage of pregnancy, therefore, it will be difficult for the petitioner to go to Chanju Mehla, District Chamba, which is at a distance of about 50 kms from his present place of posting. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has filed a representation dated 23.06.2025 to respondent No.2/competent authority, in that regard. Learned counsel also submitted that the petitioner would be content, in case, respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner in respect of his suitable adjustment, in accordance with law, within a time bound manner. Learned Assistant Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 3. Looking to the limited grievance of the petitioner, without interfering with the impugned transfer order dated 20.06.2025 in respect of petitioner’s transfer from his present place of posting, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy, 3 within a period of one week from today. 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 28th June, 2025(rohit)