Jagiri Ram Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Jagiri Ram Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation (Annexure P-4) expeditiously, preferably within two weeks, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and passing a speaking order noting the transfer policy concession available to an employee having disabled children; pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representations (Annexure P-4) seeking transfer on the ground of disability of his son and daughter-in-law, who are deaf and dumb, in terms of the concessions in the transfer policy.

Court's answer

Without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the present petition with direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation expeditiously, preferably within two weeks.

Ratio / Principle

While deciding the representation, the authority concerned shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order taking note of the transfer policy, which provides for certain concession to an employee having disabled children.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Jagiri Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., CWP No.13479 of 2025 (HP High Court, Shimla; Sandeep Sharma, J.; decided 22.8.2025): A Class-IV employee at Government Ayurvedic Hospital, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, sought a direction to decide his representations (Annexure P-4) for transfer on the ground that his son and daughter-in-law are deaf and dumb and there is none to care for them. Noting that the transfer policy enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on adverse family circumstances and provides certain concession to an employee having disabled children, the Court, without going into the merits, disposed of the petition directing the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation expeditiously, preferably within two weeks, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, by a speaking order taking note of the transfer policy. Pending applications, if any, stood disposed of. No reply was called since the respondents were represented by the Additional Advocate General, who fairly stated any representation would be considered sympathetically.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.13479 of 2025 Date of Decision: 22.8.2025

Jagiri Ram

……...Petitioner Versus …....Respondents

State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors.

Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sandeep Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Petitioner herein, who, at present, is working as ClassIV at Government Ayurvedic Hospital Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his representations (Annexure P-4), whereby he has prayed for his transfer to one of the stations as detailed in the representation on the ground of disability of his son and daughter-in-law, who are deaf and dumb.

2. Having regard to the nature of order proposed to be passed in the instant proceedings, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. B.C.Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, who fairly states that

2 -

representation, if any, filed by the petitioner, shall be considered and decided sympathically.

3. Since it is quite apparent from the pleading adduced on record in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, that son and daughter-in-law of the petitioner are deaf and dumb and there is none to take care of them coupled with the fact that transfer policy enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on account of adverse family circumstances, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with direction to the respondents to consider and decide pending representation of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within two weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order taking note of transfer policy, which provides for certain concession to an employee having disabled children. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

August 22, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (manjit) Judge