Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2922 (HP)

BINDRA DEVI v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/1779/2026 · 2026-02-10

Romesh Verma

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1779 of 2026 Date of Decision: 10.02.2026 Bindra Devi ...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: Ms. Tara Devi and Ms. Ayushi Sharma, Advocates. For the respondents: Mr. L.N.Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral) The present petition has been filed seeking mainly the following reliefs: “ i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation of the Petitioner dated 07.01.2026 ( Annexure P-2) and the recommendation forwarded by Respondent No.3 ( Annexure P-1) within a time bound period. ii) Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to transfer/ adjust the Petitioner from GSSS Khakhriana to any one of the vacant stations mentioned in her representation, specifically GSSS Tawan, GSSS Lohara, or GSSS Gagal, or against the longer stay incumbents mentioned therein, in view of the extreme medical hardship of her husband. Iii) Direct the respondents to produce the entire record pertaining to the transfer and posting of Principals in District Mandi to demonstrate the availability of vacancies.” 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner shall be satisfied in case the representation, which has been made by her, vide Annexure P-2, dated 07.01.2026, is ordered to be decided in accordance with law. 3. Accordingly, respondents are directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-2, dated 07.01.2026 expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today in accordance with law. 4. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the decision on the representation shall be taken by the authority concerned strictly in accordance with law. 5. In view of the aforesaid, present petition is disposed of, so also, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Romesh Verma) Vacation Judge February 10, 2026 (Nisha)