Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 277 (HP)

JAGDISH KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/1844/2026 · 2026-02-13

Romesh Verma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1844 of 2026 Date of Decision: 13.02.2026 Jagdish Kumar ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others ..Respondents. Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Vacation Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Narender Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1,2 and 4. Mr. Rajesh Prakash, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral) The present petition has been filed seeking mainly the following reliefs: “ i) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure P-3 i.e. impugned office order dated 11.02.2026. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue at Gram Panchayat Chanol Development Block Sunder Nagar, District Mndi, H.P. or petitioner may kindly be adjusted against vacant post of Secretary at GP Bobar, Development Block Sunder Nagar in the interest of justice.” 2. During the course of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be satisfied, in case the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the concerned authorities, for the redressal of his grievances. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction, that in case, the present petitioner file a representation to the concerned authorities within a period of three days from today, in that case, the same shall be sympathetically considered and decided by the concerned authorities within a period of three weeks of the filing of the representation, thereafter, and the same shall be decided strictly as per the averments made in the representation. Till then, petitioner shall not be disturbed from his present place of posting. 4. Needless to say, that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case and the concerned authority (ies) is/are at liberty to take decision in accordance with law. 5. Petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application, if any. (Romesh Verma) Vacation Judge February 13, 2026 (Nisha)