Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37578 (HP)

BALJEET SINGH v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/18508/2025 · 2025-11-28

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.18508 of 2025 Decided on:28th November, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Baljeet Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. C.S.Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Petitioner is Class-IV employee who has served at Government Primary School, Rain Baru, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh w.e.f. March, 2022 to June, 2025. On 20.06.2025, services of petitioner were 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 regularized and he was transferred to Government Senior Secondary School(GSSS), Millah, Education Block, Bakras, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmour, H.P stated to be hard area. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner being Class-IV employee and on account of illness suffered by his mother, preferred a representation on 06.10.2025 (Annexure P-2) to respondent for his adjustment on medical grounds. However, said representation has not been decided till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case the respondents are directed to consider and decided his representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Looking to the limited grievance of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-2) in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy, within a period of six weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 28, 2025 Judge yogesh