Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26239 (HP)

PRINCE KUMAR v. STATE OF HP AND ANR

CWP/15360/2025 · 2025-09-23

Satyen Vaidya

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Civil Writ Petition No. 15360 of 2025. Date of decision: 23 rd September, 2025. Prince Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Addl. A.G. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral). Notice. Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, learned Addl. Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. The instant petition has been filed with limited prayer to direct the second respondent to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-2), in a time bound manner. 3. Petitioner submits that he has already served for the normal tenure in the sub cadre area and has thus become entitled to be posted at a station of his choice. In this 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? context, the representation, as noticed above, has been submitted by him. 4. Record reveals that representation, Annexure P-2, has been submitted by the petitioner through proper channel on 16th May, 2025. In terms of the transfer policy adopted by the State Government, petitioner is entitled to seek his transfer to a place of his choice, in case he has already served in the sub cadre area for the requisite period. Be that as it may, once the petitioner has submitted his representation to the competent authority, the same is required to be disposed of with sufficient expedition. 5. The prayer made in the petition is innocuous and the same is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-2, within three weeks from today strictly in terms of the transfer policy adopted by the State Government. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity of being heard by the second respondent before taking final decision on the representation. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. …2… 6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) Judge 23rd September, 2025. (jai) …3…