Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3770 (HP)

CHETAN VIRAJ v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/1076/2026 · 2026-01-09

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.1076 of 2026 Decided on: 09.01.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chetan Viraj …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Ors .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Lovenesh Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is serving as Junior Engineer in the office of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), Sub-Division, HPPWD Udaipur, at Keylong, District Lahaul & Spiti, H.P., a hard and tribal area. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has completed his normal tenure at the aforesaid station and is at the verge of retirement. He has preferred a representation to respondent No.2 on 16.06.2025 (Annexure P-1), which was also forwarded by respondent No.2 to respondent No.1 on 20.06.2025, but till date the petitioner not been communicated any decision thereof. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied in case he is permitted to file a fresh representation to the respondent No.2/ Competent Authority for redressal of his grievances and the respondents/Competent Authority is directed to decide the same within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 5. Having regard to above submissions but without examining the merits of the matter, this petition is disposed by permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation within two weeks, which shall be decided by respondent No.2 /Competent Authority within six weeks from the date of receipt of the same, in accordance with law. The decision so arrived at, shall be communicated to the petitioner. 3 Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 9, 2026 Judge R.Atal