IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No.26 of 2025 Decided on: 10.01.2025 Sanjay Kumar ...Appellant Versus State of H.P. ...Respondent Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the appellant: Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Parv Sharma, Ms. Vishali Lakhanpal and Mr. P.K. Chauhan, Advocates. G.S. Sandhawalia Chief Justice (Oral) The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge in CWP No.289 of 2025, which was dismissed on 4th January, 2025. The learned Single Judge has chosen not to interfere with the transfer order dated 19.12.2024, whereby the petitioner had been sent to Municipal Council, Chamba from Municipal Council, Sujanpur Tihra against vacant post in condonation of short stay in relaxation of ban on transfers in the public interest. The reason which weighed with the learned Single Judge was that on earlier occasion the petitioner was serving as an Executive Officer at Sujanpur-Tihra from 27.08.2019 2 and except for a short stint of about 13 days when he had been transferred, he continued to stay there. It has been thus noticed that more than four years and four months have passed and the petitioner has no vested right as such to serve at that place. 2. The arguments that he was suffering from some spinal issues and the climate of Chamba is cold and he has aged parents were rejected on the ground that the transfers are not liable to be interfered by the High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction and it would be impossible for the State to manage its affairs. 3. It is further noted that Chamba is the District Headquarter, which has moderate temperature and adequate medical facilities where the petitioner can treat his spinal issues as such. 4. An argument has been raised that the petitioner has only one year and one month of stay at Sujanpur-Tihra and had been posted there on 1st December, 2023. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a tabulated chart, perusal whereof shows that on earlier occasion also the petitioner had been posted at Sujanpur-Tihra, as noted by 3 the learned Single Judge. It is noticed effectively that from 2019 onwards the petitioner has either been in Sujanpur- Tihra or at adjoining areas at Hamirpur and Bilaspur, whereas on one occasion he had been posted at Chamba on 02.08.2022, which transfer order the petitioner had got successfully quashed by way of CWP No.5515 of 2022. 5. 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. 6. Resultantly, we do not find any plausible reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine along with pending application(s), if any. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice ( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge January 10, 2025 (vt)