Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16204 (HP)

HUKAM CHAND BHARDWAJ v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/9233/2025 · 2025-06-03

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9233 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.06.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Hukam Chand Bhardwaj ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Ankit Dhiman, Advocate, vice Mr. Hemant Kumar Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Lecturer (SN) (Economics) at Government Senior Secondary School Luhri, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved by impugned transfer order dated 28.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Government Senior Secondary School Neether, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, vice Mr. Pawan Kumar, respondent No. 4. 2. Though having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting and distance between the transferred station and the present place of posting is not more than 25Kms, this Court sees no reason to interfere in the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld. However, having taken note of the fact that father of the petitioner is unwell and requires constant care of his son, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within a period of one week, seeking adjustment at a convenient station, which shall be decided by the competent authority within one week. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders taking note of Transfer Policy, which enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at a convenient station on account of adverse family circumstances. Till the time, representation, as detailed herein above, is not decided in terms of instant order, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at transferred station in terms of impugned transfer order. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. June 03, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2