Mamta Dhiman Vs State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mamta Dhiman Vs State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-4) positively within two days from the date of decision, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; pending applications, if any, also disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of certiorari should be issued quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.05.2026 and 20.06.2026. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties and without going into the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2.

Key takeaways

At the hearing the petitioner indicated she would be satisfied if respondent No. 2 considered and decided her representation dated 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-4); notice stood confined to respondents No. 1 to 3 only, and the Additional Advocate General accepted notice on their behalf.obiter¶13
Respondent No. 2 is directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-4) positively within two days from the date of decision, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.ratio¶21
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP No. 9475 of 2026 (High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla; decided orally on 11.06.2026 by Romesh Verma, Judge). Petitioner Mamta Dhiman sought (i) quashing of the impugned order(s) dated 20.05.2026 and 20.06.2026 by writ of certiorari, (ii) a writ of mandamus directing decision of her representation dated 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-4) and adjustment against vacancy, and (iii) transfer of respondents No. 5 and 6 instead of her against respondent No. 4. At hearing she agreed to rest with a decision on her representation alone. With the consent of counsel on both sides, and expressly without going into the merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representation dated 25.05.2026 positively within two days, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing; pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Notice had been confined to respondents No. 1 to 3 only. No statutory provision or precedent was cited; no amount or quantum figures in the judgment.

2026:HHC:22032

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 9475 of 2026

Date of decision : 11.06.2026.

Mamta Dhiman ...Petitioner.

Versus

State of H.P. & others ...Respondents.

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge .

Whether approved for reporting?¹

For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumar Dhiman, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Sushant Kaprate, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 to 3.

Romesh Verma, Judge (Oral):

Notice confined to respondents No. 1 to 3 only. Learned Additional Advocate General accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3.

The present writ petition has been filed for the following substantive reliefs:-

“a) A writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued by quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.05.2026 and 20.06.2026.

b) A writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued thereby directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner Annexure P-4 and the petitioner may kindly be adjusted against vacancy.

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

-2-

c) That respondents No.5 and 6 may be transferred instead of petitioner against respondent Nno.4 and orders may kindly be modified.”

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner shall be satisfied, in case direction is issued to respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-4).

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties and without going into the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 25.05.2026 (Annexure P-4), positively within two days from today, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(Romesh Verma) Judge

11^th June, 2026.

(kck)