IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11893 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.10.2025 _______________________________________________________ Dheeraj Chandel …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Umesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Senior Assistant in the Office of HPPWD Division, Bhawarna, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of order dated 04.07.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to HPPWD Division, Sangrah, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh against vacant post. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner, is that impugned transfer order is in violation of transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh because he has been not permitted to complete his normal tenure of 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 three years at present place of posting. He states that prior to his posting at present place of posting, petitioner has been working at Tauni Devi, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, where he remained posted w.e.f.18.09.2012 to 21.06.2024. 3. Pursuant to the notice issued in the instant proceedings, respondent-State has filed reply under the signatures of Engineer-in- Chief, Shimla, perusal whereof reveals that transfer order dated 04.07.2025 has been issued by the respondents in larger public interest. Most importantly, it has been specifically admitted in the reply that petitioner was transferred from HPPWD Division, Bhawarna to HPPWD Division, Sangrah vide impugned transfer order with the prior approval of competent authority conveyed vide UO No. Secy/ CM- 22013/2022-VIP-A-202692 dated 30.06.2025, meaning thereby petitioner herein cannot be said to be transferred in public interest, rather on the basis of recommendation of some influential person. Reply filed by the respondents further reveals that petitioner was posted at present place of posting on 24.06.2024, meaning thereby he has not completed normal tenure of posting of three years. 4. Once transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh prescribes for minimum period of three years at one station, coupled with the fact that no public interest or administrative exigency has been highlighted/mentioned in the reply, 3 there appears to be merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been transferred to far flung area on the basis of U.O. Note issued by a political person. 5. Having taken note of the fact that petitioner stands transferred from present place of posting to Sangrah on the basis of DO note, as detailed hereinabove, coupled with the fact that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting, this Court finds sufficient reasons to interfere with the impugned transfer order and as such, impugned transfer order dated 04.07.2025 (Annexure P-1) is quashed and set-aside. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 1. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge October 09,2025 (shankar)