The petitioner has challenged the state government’s October 1, 2025 decision through which Gupta was entrusted with the additional charge of Chief Secretary. The plea alleged that the decision violated established norms and vigilance-related guidelines governing appointments to sensitive posts.The Himachal Pradesh High Court has issued notice to the state government on a public interest litigation challenging the decision to entrust the officiating charge of Chief Secretary to senior IAS officer Sanjay Gupta, alleging violation of prescribed norms.A division bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin Chander Negi passed the order while hearing a petition filed by Tilak Raj Sharma. The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 21, 2026.Appearing for the state government, Deputy Advocate General Sidharth Jalta accepted notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 — the State and the Chief Secretary — while Central Government Counsel Janak Raj accepted notice on behalf of the Union of India. Gupta, a 1988-batch IAS officer, is due to retire on May 31.The petitioner has challenged the state government’s October 1, 2025 decision through which Gupta was entrusted with the additional charge of Chief Secretary. The plea alleged that the decision violated established norms and vigilance-related guidelines governing appointments to sensitive posts.During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner, advocate Deven Khanna, informed the court that the petitioner had deposited Rs 2 lakh in compliance with an earlier order dated April 24, 2026, to establish his bona fides in pursuing the PIL.The petitioner relied on the revised guidelines dated October 9, 2024, regarding grant of vigilance clearance to All India Services and Central Civil Services officers. Referring to Clause 7 of the guidelines, the petition argued that appointments to sensitive posts must take into account the vigilance status of the officer concerned before such decisions are taken by the competent authority.The plea further stated that the Supreme Court had repeatedly held the post of Chief Secretary to be an extremely sensitive constitutional and administrative position. In support of the argument, reliance was placed on the apex court judgment in E.P. Royappa vs State of Tamil Nadu and Another (1974) 4 SCC 3.Story continues below this adThe petitioner also cited principles laid down by the Himachal Pradesh High Court in Atul Sharma vs Union of India (CWPIL No. 26 of 2025), decided on November 21, 2025, contending that the present PIL was maintainable on the principle of “institutional integrity”.The petition maintained that the litigation had been filed purely in public interest and that the petitioner had no personal stake in the matter.After hearing preliminary submissions, the division bench issued notice to the respondents and posted the matter for further consideration on July 21.Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram© The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:Shimla