Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/9879/2014 on 30 December 2014
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. 9879 of 2014-H
Date of decision: 30.12.2014.
Satish Kumar Sharma
…..Petitioner
Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others ….Respondents ________________________________________________
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 _________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Lalit Kumar Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with Mr. Romesh Verma, Mr. M.A. Khan, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No. 1.
Nemo for respondents No. 2 & 3.
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice (Oral)
CMP No. 21076 of 2014
Leave granted. The application is disposed of.
CWP No. 9879 of 2014
2. It is contended in the writ petition that the petitioner, after promotion to the post of Principal (School Cadre), was transferred on 23rd December, 2014 and posted at Government Senior Secondary School, Bakhli, Mandi. He joined there on 24th December, 2014, but on the same day, a fresh order 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? High Court of H.P. 2014:HHC:11805-DB ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 00:11:00 :::CIS
- 2 - came to be issued whereby he was transferred to Government Senior Secondary School Holi, in District Chamba, H.P. It is averred in the writ petition that the said order has been issued at the behest of political interference and on some D.O. Note.
3. Issue notice. Mr. J.K. Verma, learned Deputy Advocate General waives notice on behalf of the respondents-State.
4. Prima facie, it appears that the order impugned in this petition (Annexure P4) is bad. However, we deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition at this stage by directing the respondents to examine the case of the petitioner afresh and make decision within four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Till then, operation of impugned order Annexure P4, qua the petitioner is stayed.
5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Copy dasti.
(Mansoor Ahmad Mir)
Chief Justice.
December 30, 2014
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) (hemlata)
Judge. High Court of H.P. 2014:HHC:11805-DB ::: Downloaded on - 04/11/2026 00:11:00 :::CIS