CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Parveen Kumar vs State Of HP And Others

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 10 June 2026 · Citation: (2026) 06 SHI CK 0538

HON’BLE JUDGES
Romesh Verma, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 9391 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 331 words

Romesh Verma, J

1.

Notice. Mr. Sushant Kaprate, learned Additional Advocate General appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent-State.

2.

The preset petition has been filed for the grant of following substantive reliefs:

"a. That a writ in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ , order or directi8on, may kindly be issued fr quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 30.5.2026 (Annexure P-9), whereby the petitioner has been directed to be escorted to Police Headquarters through police officials, the same being arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in the eyes of law.

b. That a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, may kindly be issued directing the respondents to deal with the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and the applicable disciplinary rules and not to treat the petitioner as an absconder, fugitive or a person evading legal process during the pendency of the departmental proceedings.

c. That a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, may kindly be issued directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the petitioner for grant of premature retirement/voluntary retirement, in accordance with the applicable rules and police governing the field, keeping in view the serious medical condition of the petitioner's wife and son, the compelling family circumstances and the inability of the petitioner to continue to effectively discharge his duties on account thereof."

3.

Mr. Sushant Kaprate, learned Additional Advocate General, has placed on record communication dated 9th June, 2026, whereby the main grievance of the present petitioner seems to have been redressed.

4.

Faced with this situation, Mr. Anshul Jairath, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file fresh, if need so arises. Permission granted.

5.

In view of above, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty, as aforesaid. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.