IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.19795 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.12.2025 _______________________________________________________ Seema Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate Generals. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who has been recently promoted from the post of Lecturer(Hindi) to the post of Headmaster vide order dated 10.12.2025(Annexure P-1), was ordered to be posted at Government High School Gangloh, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. After receipt of aforesaid promotion order, petitioner went to Government High School, Gangloh, District Bilaspur for joining, however she was not permitted to join by the Principal of the school concerned on the pretext that there is no vacant post. In the aforesaid background, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for following main reliefs:- “i) That the writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued and quashed and set aside the impugned notification Annexure P-1 dated 10.12.2025 only to the extent the petitioner has been ordered to be posted at GHS, Gangloh District Bilaspur as the post of Head Master to which the petitioner has been ordered to be 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 posted is not vacant and an incumbent is already working on the said post; ii) That the writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued, directing the respondents to adjust and accommodate the petitioner at any other suitable post/vacancy, where the post of Head Maser is lying vacant or the incumbent already working has completed his normal tenure by modifying the notification dated 10.12.2025.” 2. Having regard to the nature of controversy and peculiar circumstances of the case, this Court vide order dated 15.12.2025 called upon learned Additional Advocate General to have instructions. Pursuant to the direction passed by this Court, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record office order dated 17.12.2025, issued by the Director, School Education, Himachal Pradesh, which is taken on record. Perusal of aforesaid order reveals that petitioner herein, who at first instance was ordered to be posted at GHS, Gangloh, has been transferred to GHS, Charoli, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh against vacancy. 3. Learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that GHS, Charoli, District Shimla is at a distance of 380 Km from the present place of posting of the petitioner. She states that since petitioner is due to retire within a period of less than two years, she otherwise could not have been posted at a far flung area, rather she ought to have been given posting at a convenient station. 3 4. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while justifying the issuance of order dated 17.12.2025, submits that since petitioner has been promoted from the post of Lecturer (Hindi) to the post of Headmaster, she cannot raise ground of her nearing retirement and otherwise also, present petition is not maintainable for the reason that relief otherwise prayed for in the instant petition stands granted to the petitioner. 5. True it is that on account of promotion to the post of Headmaster, petitioner was required to be transferred from her present place of posting, but it is not in dispute that pursuant to order dated 10.12.2025(Annexure P-1), whereby petitioner was posted at GHS, Gangloh, District Bilaspur, petitioner went to the school concerned for joining but she was not permitted to do so for the reason that there is no vacant post. There is nothing to suggest that petitioner ever expressed her unwillingness to join at GHS, Gangloh, District Bilaspur, rather she instead of her being permitted to join at afore school has been directed to join at GHS, Charoli, District Shimla, which falls in Tehsil Kupvi (Chopal). This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that aforesaid school i.e. GHS, Charoli falls in difficult area. Since petitioner is due to retire in the month of May, 2027 i.e. less than two years, coupled with fact that transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee nearing retirement to seek posting at a convenient station, this Court 4 is persuaded to agree with learned counsel for the petitioner that in the event of non-availability of vacant post at GHS, Gangloh, District Bilaspur, petitioner who is otherwise more than 56 years old, ought to have been given posting at nearby station, but certainly not at a far flung area like GHS, Charoli, District Shimla. 6. 6. Though, learned Additional Advocate General attempted to argue that transfer policy formulated by Government of Himachal Pradesh will not come in the help of the petitioner for the reason that she has been posted out on account of promotion, this Court is not impressed with the aforesaid submission of learned Additional Advocate General. 7. Admittedly, petitioner has been promoted to the post of Headmaster, but on account of the fact that she has been posted at some other station, which also amounts to transfer of an employee. No doubt, on promotion an employee is necessarily required to join at a new transfer station, but while issuing such orders, respondents are required to take note of various factor including date of retirement of the employee, who is promoted or transferred. Since in the instant case petitioner is to retire within a period of less than two years, she ought not to have been transferred to GHS, Charoli, which is at a distance of 380 Km from the present place of posting. 5 8. Consequently, in view of the above, the present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 17.12.2025 is quashed and set-aside, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation(Annexure P-3) of the petitioner, wherein she has given five stations, where she can be posted, within a period of two weeks. 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 order, taking note of observations made hereinabove and in case stations pointed out by the petitioner are not vacant or there is any other administrative exigencies, respondents may consider the posting of the petitioner at some other convenient station. Till the time representation of the petitioner is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall continue to discharge her duties at her previous place of posting i.e. GHS Gangloh, District Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 1. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge December 18, 2025 (shankar)