Sanjay Joshi v. HP State Agricultural Marketing Board
CWPOA/6001/2020 · 2026-06-19
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 12385 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 12385 (HP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2026:HHC:23540 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
CWPOA No.6001 of 2020
Decided on: 19th June, 2026
Sanjay Joshi
....Petitioner
versus
Himachal Pradesh State Agricultural Marketing Board.
...Respondent
Coram Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the petitioner: Mr. Dushyant Dadwal and Mr. Shashwat Dadwal, Advocates.
For the respondents: Mr. Virender Singh Rathore, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr. Sumit Sharma, Deputy Advocate General for respondent No.2.
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge (Oral)
Keeping in view the nature of order proposed to be passed in the present petition, at the oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, Secretary (Agriculture) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-02 is ordered to be impleaded as respondent No.2,
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of addressing the arguments has submitted that the petitioner
1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
( 2026:HHC:23540 ) 2
has already filed a representation before respondent No.2, who on the earlier occasion, had upgraded the post of Law Officer as Deputy Director (Law)/Deputy Legal Advisor-cum- Law Officer in H.P. State Agricultural Marketing Board.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instructions from his client that his client would be content in case a direction is given to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 30.01.2026 pending before him.
4.
Keeping in view the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 30.01.2026 filed by the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of copy of order. Needless to say that in case the decision on the representation goes against the petitioner, he will be at liberty to assail the same in accordance with law.
5.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
No order as to costs.
( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) 19th June, 2026
Judge (naveen)