CWP/16690/2024 on 31 December 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.16690 of 2024

Decided on: 31st December, 2024 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yadvinder Kumar

…..Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. and others

.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Raju Ram Rahi, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Balwinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice confined to respondents No.1 to 3, which is waived by Mr. Balwinder Singh, learned Deputy Advocate General.

2. Petitioner’s grievance is that while adjusting one Sh. Hem Raj in view of judgment dated 21.10.2024 passed in CWP No.2746 of 2024 (Hem Raj Versus State of H.P. and others), the petitioner has been transferred from GSSS Dhangiara, District Mandi to GSSS Lohara, District Mandi. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.

petitioner was posted at Dhangiara, District Mandi only on 09.12.2024. Learned counsel also submits that private respondent No.4-Smt. Chinta Mani has already joined at GSSS Dhangiara, District Mandi, i.e. the place earlier occupied by the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of the above facts, the petitioner is ready and willing to submit a representation to respondent No.2 for his suitable adjustment to some other place as he has been wrongly shifted by the respondents from GSSS Dhangiara, District Mandi to GSSS Lohara, District Mandi in order to accommodate Smt. Chintamani (respondent No.4) & Sh. Hem Raj and respondent No.2/competent authority be directed to decide the representation to be preferred by the petitioner within a time bound schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

4. Looking into the nature of the grievance raised by the petitioner and having regarding to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to furnish a representation to respondent No.2/competent authority within a period of one week from today, which in turn, shall

be considered and decided by respondent No.2/competent authority in accordance with law and applicable policy keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, within a period of two weeks thereafter. 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, 2024

Judge Mukesh