IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17581 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.11.2025 _______________________________________________________ Surjeet Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan and Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for State. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): While placing on record communication dated 15.11.2025, issued under the signatures of Director, Technical Education, Vocational & Industrial Training, Sundernagar, H.P., Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that petitioner herein was initially appointed as Instructor (Mechanic Motor Vehicle) in the department, however, due to administrative requirement, he was adjusted against the post of Instructor Driver- cum-Mechanic at Government ITI Bharari since 18.04.2022. Now two sanctioned posts of petitioner’s trade i.e. Instructor (Mechanic Motor Vehicle) are available and lying vacant at Government ITI Chamba, where two units of the Mechanic Motor Vehicle trade are functional 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 with 40 trainees. To maintain continuity of training, one IMC Trainer, Mr. Kamal Kishore, is temporarily engaged, and the Principal, ITI Chamba, has repeatedly requested for posting of a regular Mechanic Motor Vehicle Instructor. Moreover, petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting in ITI Bharari. One Mr. Neeraj Kumar, who is substantively appointed as Instructor Driver-cum-Mechanic (LMV) at Government ITI Mandi, has been adjusted in Government ITI, Bharari, against the vacancy arose due to transfer of the petitioner, so that studies of students studying in afore Institution does not suffer. 2. Having taken note of aforesaid documents, which are taken on record, this Court finds that though petitioner was appointed as Instructor (Mechanic Motor Vehicle) in the department, but he was adjusted against the post of Instructor Driver-cum-Mechanic at Government ITI Bharari in the year 2022, but now since two sanctioned posts of petitioner’s trade have become available, he has been transferred from afore station to Chamba, so that 40-50 students studying therein in the trade of petitioner are able to get proper instructions and training. 3. Since respondents have appointed Mr. 3. Since respondents have appointed Mr. Neeraj Kumar, whose services have been otherwise rendered surplus at ITI Mandi on account of non-admission of trainees in Driver-cum-Mechanic trade for session for 2025-26, there is no likelihood of suffering of 3 studies of the students studying at Government ITI Bharari on account of transfer of the petitioner in mid-academic session. 4. In view of the above, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld. Present petition fails and dismissed accordingly. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge November 18, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)