Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4766 (HP)

ANITA DEVI v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/8510/2025 · 2025-06-27

Jyotsna Rewal Dua

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.8510 of 2025 Decided on: 27th June, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Anita Devi ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order passed in this case on 23.05.2025, granting interim relief to the petitioner against the transfer order impugned in this petition also gives gist of the case:- “Issue notice to respondent No.4, returnable for 21.06.2025, on taking steps within two days. In addition to ordinary process, petitioner is at liberty to serve respondent No.4 by way of dasti. 2. Petitioner, a Language Teacher, is aggrieved against 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - office order dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby she has been transferred from Government Senior Secondary School Sataun to Government Senior Secondary School Kota Pab. Transfer has been assailed on the grounds that:- (i) Petitioner has been transferred to a hard area under the impugned order, where she has already served for about 10 years in hard area, therefore she cannot be transferred to a hard area again (ii) Petitioner has been transferred only to accommodate respondent No.4. It was respondent No.4, who was originally transferred to Government Senior Secondary School Kota Pab. Instead of joining Government Senior Secondary School Kota Pab, respondent No.4 managed her transfer at the place of the petitioner. (iii) The impugned transfer has been ordered on the basis of D.O. Note No.190743 dated 15.05.2025. 3. In view of above, the petitioner has made out a case for grant of interim relief. Accordingly, office order dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. 4. Reply on behalf of appearing respondents be also filed in the meanwhile. List on 21.06.2025.” 2. Respondent No.4 has filed reply to the writ petition. Reply does not deny the fact that impugned transfer order was issued on the basis of a D.O. note at the instance of respondent No.4. Learned Deputy Advocate General has also placed on record office instructions dated 26.06.2025, giving - 3 - incumbency of the petitioner. In terms of the said incumbency, petitioner has served at GSSS Kanti-Maswa District Sirmour w.e.f. 17.01.2015 to 25.03.2018 and thereafter she served in two schools i.e. GSSS Kamrau and GSSS Sataun, both in District Sirmour within a radius of 30 K.Ms. 3. Under the impugned order, petitioner has been transferred from GSSS Sataun to GSSS Kota Pab. Petitioner’s grievance is that the transferred place falls under hard area in terms of the applicable Transfer Policy, whereas, she has already served sub-cadre area of Kanti-Maswa. Respondents No.1 to 3 in their office instructions admit petitioner’s having served at GSSS Kanti-Maswa from 17.01.2015 to 25.03.2018, however, submit that the said area does not fall under sub-cadre area. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that presently Kanti-Maswa does not fall under sub-cadre area, but at the time of petitioner’s posting, the said area was notified as sub-cadre area. 4. In view of above, there is merit in petitioner’s contention that she cannot be transferred to a hard area - 4 - having already served the hard area. Her stand that impugned order transferring her to GSSS Kota Pab is on the basis of a D.O. note, has also been vindicated. Therefore, the impugned order dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) is quashed and set aside. However, considering petitioner’s incumbency position, respondents No.1 to 3 are at liberty to consider the case of the petitioner for transfer afresh in accordance with law and applicable policy. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge June 27, 2025 R.Atal