Tejendera Sharma vs Himachal Pradesh Road Transport
2025 Latest Caselaw 1944 HP

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Tejendera Sharma vs Himachal Pradesh Road Transport on 15 July, 2025

Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11292 of 2025 Date of decision: 15.07.2025

Tejendera Sharma. ...Petitioner.

.

Versus

Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation. ...Respondent.

Coram:

Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

    For the petitioner              :      Mr.   Bimal   Gupta,                    Senior
                                           Advocate with    Ms.                   Kusum
                                           Chaudhary, Advocate.
    For the respondents
                       r            :      Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate.

    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Notice. Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate, appears and

waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With

the consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is

heard at this stage.

2. Petitioner is serving as Senior Assistant in the

Bilaspur Unit of respondent-Corporation. She feels aggrieved

against office order dated 21.06.2025 that transfers her to

the Corporation's Head Office at Shimla.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

she is a disabled person suffering from permanent disability

of hearing impairment to the extent of 50%. She met with an

accident in the year 2021 causing chip fracture of her pubic 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

bones due to which she remained hospitalized for more than

a month. Petitioner has projected in the writ petition that

serving at the Head Office at Shimla might pose difficulty for

.

her in view of location of the Head Office at Shimla and the

nature of disability suffered by her. Learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that petitioner has represented to the

respondents on 25.06.2025 (Annexure P-5) seeking her

adjustment. However, the aforesaid representation has not

been decided till date.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits

that the petitioner would be satisfied, in case she is

permitted to file a fresh representation seeking her

adjustment, whereafter, the competent authority/

respondents may be directed to consider and decide the

same in accordance with law and taking into account her

disability and the accident suffered by her, within a time-

bound schedule. This is not objected to by learned counsel

for the respondents.

4. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of

by permitting the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation

within two days from today. In case, such representation is

so preferred, the competent authority shall consider and

decide the same, in accordance with law, within further

period of seven days. The order so passed shall also be

communicated to the petitioner.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, to

.

also stand disposed of.

                                                Jyotsna Rewal Dua





    15th July, 2025                                   Judge
       (Pardeep)




                      r         to