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
17 paragraphs · 269 wordsVivek Singh Thakur, J
Notice. Mr.Dinesh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4 and
seeks time to file reply.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would be contented if he is permitted to represent his case afresh by pointing
out another suitable station, as prayed in prayer clause (iii) of the petition, with a direction to the respondent/authority to consider and decide the same
in time bound manner.
In view of order proposed to be passed hereinafter, no notice is required to be issued to respondent No.5 and also no response/reply/instructions are
warranted to be called for on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4.
As prayed on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation before respondent No.2, the Director, Elementary
Education, Himachal Pradesh, on or before 19.02.2021 and in case such representation is made, supported by documents, the same shall be decided
by respondent No.2, after providing him opportunity of personal hearing, if desired so, by passing a speaking and reasoned order, addressing the
grievances raised by the petitioner in the representation, on or before 15.03.2021.
The joining time of petitioner, pursuant to order dated 09.02.2021 in GPS Dadahu as Centre Head Teacher, shall stand extended till decision of the
representation and fresh appropriate joining time shall be permitted to the petitioner in accordance with the decision to be taken by respondent No.2 in
the representation so preferred by the petitioner.
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Copy dasti.