( 2025:HHC:3019 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP(M) No. 2071 of 2024 in LPA No. 36 of 2025 Date of decision: 10.01.2025. Ravi Kumar ...Appellant. Versus State of H.P. & others ...Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Mr. Surya Chauhan, Advocate. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (oral): CMP(M) No. 2071 of 2024 The delay is condoned in view of the averments made in the application. The application stands disposed of. LPA No. 36 of 2025 2. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition No. 3207 of 2024 vide order dated 18.09.2024, by noting that the petitioner was serving as TGT (Non-Medical) in District Bilaspur for more 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- than 15 years and within the radius of 30 k.m. from the District Headquarter was transferred to Jubla in District Solan, and the transfer order, subject matter of consideration was not interfered with. 3. Counsel for the appellant did not show that the order of transfer was actuated by any malafide and keeping in view the settled principle of law that the transfer is an incidence of service and the jurisdiction as such for judicial review is only limited to the extent that where arbitrariness is to be shown in the transfer, which is apparently not seen since the appellant was serving in Bilaspur for more than 15 years. 4. It is a settled law that transfers are of exigency of service and in absence of transfers being malafide or arbitrary the writ Court would not as such interfere. Reference can be made to State of U. P. & Ors vs Gobardhan Lal, 2004(11) SCC 402 and Union of India vs Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit, 2020(3) SCC 404. -3- 5. No plausible reason has been assigned by the appellant, as such, the appeal is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (G. S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Satyen Vaidya) Judge 10th January, 2025 (kck)