Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 36403 (HP)

KAMAL RAJ KAPILA v. THE STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER

CWP/19508/2025 · 2025-12-12

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.19508 of 2025 Decided on: 12.12. 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Kamal Raj Kapila ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Ganesh Browalia, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Sikandar Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner preferred Kamal Raj Kapila Vs. State of HP and Anr.2 seeking transfer from his present place of posting i.e. GHS Padechi u/c GSSS Koti, Block Mashobra, District Shimla on certain grounds. The writ petition was disposed of with direction to the respondents to decide 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 CWP No.14752 of 2025, decided on 12.09.2025 - 2 - petitioner’s pending representation in this regard within a given time frame. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.2 passed the office order on 18.10.2025, rejecting petitioner’s representation with the observations that the stations indicated by the petitioner were not lying vacant and transfer would affect the academic process of the students in the ongoing academic session. The order rejecting petitioner’s representation gives cogent reasons for not allowing the same and does not require any interference. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that another vacancy is available where petitioner can be accommodated i.e. GSSS Brang, District Mandi. 4. If that is so, it is for the petitioner to appropriately represent to the concerned authority and it is for the authority to take a call in the matter within a reasonable time. 5. With the above observations, the present writ petition to stand disposed of. - 3 - Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge December 12, 2025 R.Atal