Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34469 (HP)

AMIT KUMAR SHARMA v. THE CHAIRMAN HPGB AND OTHERS

CWP/16507/2025 · 2025-11-10

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.16507 of 2025 Date of Decision: 10.11.2025 _______________________________________________________ Amit Kumar Sharma …….Petitioner Versus The Chairman, Himachal Pradesh, Gramin Bank & Ors. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Ms. Dhanvanti & Ms. Anuja Mehta, proxy counsel. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following main relief: “(i) To issue the writ of mandamus directing the respondents to heard the appeal of the petitioner which was sent on 28.05.2025.” 2. Before notices, if any, could be issued to the respondents in the instant petition, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner would be content and satisfied in case direction is issued to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the pending appeal (Annexure P-3) in a time bound manner. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Having regard to the nature of aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of respondents and deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the pending appeal (Annexure P-3), which has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 14.02.2023, whereby petitioner has been suspended after inquiry, expeditiously, preferably within four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as other stake holders and pass appropriate orders within stipulated time. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge November 10, 2025 (Sunil)