Disposed

Priyanka Thakur v. the State of Hp and Anr.

Himachal Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026CWP/16052/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a Senior Medical Lab Technician, filed a writ petition seeking direction to the respondents to consider her transfer representation within a fixed time, which was granted.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation regarding transfer in accordance with law within a fixed time schedule.

Priyanka Thakur Vs the State of Hp and Anr. — Service and Employment | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶2

CWP No. 16052 of 2026. Decided on :15th September , 2026

¶3

Priyanka Thakur Versus State of H.P. & Ors.	...Petitioner. ....Respondents.
*Coram:*
*Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.*
Whether approved for reporting?¹
For the Petitioner: Mr. Dinesh Th	akur, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Sikander General.	Bhushan, Deputy Advocate

¶4

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.

¶5

Notice. Mr. Sikander Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate

¶6

General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶7

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage.

¶8

Petitioner is serving as Senior Medical Lab Technician at CHC Gagal under BMO Ratti, District Mandi. Her grievance is that on completion of regular tenure at the aforesaid station, she preferred a representation on 29.06.2026 (Annexure P-3) seeking her transfer, but the aforesaid representation has not been considered and decided in accordance with law till date by the respondents/competent authority.

¶9

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶12

petitioner would be content in case the respondents/competent authority(s) are directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation in accordance with law within a fixed-time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer.

¶13

Having regard to the afore-submissions, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, rules and applicable transfer policy. 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.

¶14

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

¶15

Judge

¶16

15^th September, 2026. (jai)

Priyanka Thakur v. the State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanka Thakur v. the State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases