Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Vinay Kumar vs State Of H.P And Ors on 13 August, 2020

Bench: Sureshwar Thakur, Chander Bhusan Barowalia

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 2826 of 2020 Date of Decision: 13th August, 2020 .

           Vinay Kumar                                                 .....Petitioner





                                             Versus

           State of H.P and ors.                                       ......Respondents
           Coram

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge. The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Hemant Vaid and Mr. Hemanshu Mishra, Addl. AGs with Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Dy. AG, for respondents No. 1 to 3.

Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (oral).

Heard. Since the writ petitioner prays for a writ of mandamus being directed against the respondents concerned, for his being posted at a particular place, thereupon, the afore writ cannot be granted, at this stage, as this Court lacks jurisdiction, to order any public servant or public official, being posted at any particular place of his/her choice, especially given the afore power being vested in the executive.

However, after the exercise of the apposite discretion by the executive, hence to, post a public official or a public servant at a particular place, the aggrieved thereagainst, do hold, a, right to approach the Court, and, pray for, the executives' decision being judicially reviewed by the writ court. In the afore background the extant writ petition is 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

premature, as the apposite discretion, hence, has yet remained unexercised by the respondents concerned, and, as such it is dismissed, as, being not maintainable. However, the writ petitioner is .

at liberty to make a representation to the respondent concerned, for his being posted at a place of his choice, and, upon, the afore representation being made by the petitioner, the respondent concerned, shall decide it, within four weeks from its receipt, and, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing, to, the petitioner. Till then the respondents are directed to maintain status quo qua the place of posting of the petitioner. All pending applications stand disposed of.

Copy dasti.

                                                 (Sureshwar Thakur)
                                                      Judge



                                          (Chander Bhusan Barowalia)
    13th August, 2020                               Judge
     (CS)







                                                   ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2020 20:21:42 :::HCHP