Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22279 (HP)

LOKI NAND v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/13068/2025 · 2025-08-13

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. 13068/2025 Decided on: 13.08.2025 Loki Nand …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners: Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate. 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. 2. Petitioner is serving as Lab Attendant in the respondents-Education Department in District Chamba. Respondents adjusted him at Government Degree College Tissa. Petitioner’s grievance is against the office order dated 07.04.2025, whereunder he was transferred to Government Senior Secondary School Bairagarh District Chamba vice one Sh. Tula Ram. Petitioner though has joined at the transferred station, however, he has instituted this writ petition with the grievance that the transferred station falls under hard & tribal area, whereas he has already served hard & tribal area 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 previously for the requisite tenure and, therefore, could not be transferred again. It appears that the petitioner has not represented to the respondents-competent authority with regard to his grievance against the impugned transfer order. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner be afforded liberty to represent to the respondents/competent authority against the office order dated 07.04.2025, whereafter, the said respondent/competent authority be directed to decide the representation, to be made by him, in accordance with law, within time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents/competent authority, within a period of two weeks from today for the redressal of his grievance, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within a further period of three 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 13th August, 2025(rohit)