Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22965 (HP)

SANJAY KUMAR v. STATE OF HP AND ANR

CWP/11179/2024 · 2025-03-01

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11179 of 2024 Date of Decision: 1.3.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Sanjay Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. P. P. Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for following main reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s transfer request dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-1), on compassionate grounds, within a stipulated time frame; (b) Direct the respondents to transfer the petitioner to any of the schools mentioned in his transfer request, namely GSSS Meramasit, District Mandi, or GSSS Mahadev, District Mandi, or GBSSS Bhangrotu, District Mandi, against vacant posts; 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that his client would be content and satisfied in case representation dated 16.8.2024 - 2 - (Annexure P-1) filed by the petitioner is considered and decided by the respondents/competent authority in a time bound manner. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to the aforesaid innocuous prayer made by the petitioner. 3. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably, within ten days. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Liberty is also reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate court of law if he still remains aggrieved. All pending applications stand disposed of. March 1, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge