Office Ballah vs State Of Himachal
2022 Latest Caselaw 224 HP

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

                ON THE 4th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                           BEFORE




                                                     .
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA





                CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 558 OF 2022





    Between:-

    ANU KUMARI WIFE OF RAKESH
    KUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
    R/O VILLAGE KHAROUTH, POST





    OFFICE     BALLAH,   TEHSIL
    PALAMPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA,
    H.P. WORKING AS TGT (NON-
    MEDICAL) IN GSSS LYLH DISTT.
    CHAMBA HP.


                                                     ......PETITIONER

    (BY    MR.     KULBHUSHAN
    KHAJURIA, ADVOCATE)



    AND

    1.STATE     OF   HIMACHAL




    PRADESH          THROUGH
    SECRETARY (EDUCATION) TO





    THE   GOVT.   OF HIMACHAL
    PRADESH.





    2. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
    ELEMENTARY        EDUCATION,
    GOVT. OF H.P SHIMLA.

                                                 ......RESPONDENTS

    (BY MR. SHIV PAL MANHANS,
    ADDL.A.G WITH MR. VIKRANT
    CHANDEL AND MR. RAJU RAM
    RAHI, DY.A.GS    AND MR.
    SHRIYEK    SHARDA,     SR.
    ASSISTANT A.G FOR THE




                                    ::: Downloaded on - 04/02/2022 20:11:24 :::CIS
                                                    -2-



    RESPONDENTS-STATE)

    1    WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING?                                  Yes.
    This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:




                                                                            .

                                              ORDER

When the instant matter was taken up today, learned counsel

for the writ petitioner fairly states that his client would be satisfied if

representation of the writ petitioner Annexure P-1, dated 18.11.2021, shall be

decided in a time bound manner, as the same is still pending before the

respondents concerned.

2. Learned Additional Advocate General states that the

representation, so made by writ petitioner shall be decided sympathetically in a

time bound manner.

3. In view of above, the instant petition is disposed of by ordering

that the respondents concerned shall decide representation of the writ

petitioner, Annexure P-1 dated 18.11.2021, within a period of three weeks from

today and pass a reasoned order, in accordance with law.

However, it is made clear that if the writ petitioner is still

aggrieved, she has every right to approach this Court. Pending application(s), if

any, also stands disposed of.

                                                   ( Chander Bhusan Barowalia )
    4th    February , 2022                                   Vacation Judge
             (Priti)

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?