IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11555 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.07.2025 _______________________________________________________ Harkala …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Prajwal Sharma, Mr. Vinod Sharma, Ms.Mamta Kumari & Ms. Aashima, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Though this Court is fully convinced that present petition is not maintainable, however, relief, as prayed for, in the instant petition cannot be granted by this Court by exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, rather for that purpose petitioner is required to make representation to the department, which is otherwise competent to consider his prayer for extension of deputation period. 2. In view of the above, present petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 competent authority within two days, which shall be decided by the competent authority within 10 days strictly in accordance with rules. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 18, 2025 (Sunil)