Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/21098/2025 of VIPAN KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS on 31 December 2025
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.21098 of 2025 Decided on: 31st December, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vipan Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and another .....Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No.21098 of 2025
Decided on: 31st December, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vipan Kumar
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and another
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Anuja Mehta, Advocate vice
Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: 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 serving as Electrician Instructor at Government Industrial Training Institute Delath, District Shimla. His case is that he is serving at the aforesaid station for the past more than five years. That in view of 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
2
completion of much more than the normal tenure at the present place of posting and being faced with his domestic circumstances, he preferred a representation on 24.11.2025 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.2, seeking transfer. Petitioner’s grievance is that the said representation has not been considered and decided by the competent authority till date.
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 dated 24.11.2025 (Annexure P-3) in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy, within a period of four weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua December 31, 2025
Judge Mukesh