2026:HHC:28545 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4736 of 2026 Decided on: 14.07.2026 Smt. Anjana Kumari … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1Yes ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Respondents No.4 and 5 ex parte. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following re liefs:- “A. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned transfer order dated 31st March 2026 (Annexure P-7) issued by the Respondent No. 2; B. Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue at her present place of posting i.e., PHC Pragpur, District Kangra, H.P., for her full normal tenure of three years (two winters and three summers) in terms of the Transfer Policy of the State.” 2. The petitioner was transferred to PHC Pragpur, under Block Dada Siba, District Kangra, H.P., pursuant to the order/judgment dated 15.09.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.14087 of 2025, vide transfer order dated 04.10.2025 (Annexure P-5). She joined at the said station on 06.10.2025, in terms of Annexure P-6. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:28545 31.03.2025, in terms whereof, just after a few months, she has again been ordered to be transferred to PHC Dhaliara, District Kangra, H.P., against the private respondent. 3. In the backdrop of this factual matrix, when this case was listed on 16.06.2026, the following order was passed:- “The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the transfer order from PHC Pragpur to PHC Dhaliara, in terms of impugned transfer order dated 31.3.2026. Though, it is not in dispute that the distance between PHC Pragpur to PHC Dhaliara, is approximately 10 K.M, but this Court fails to understand as to why Rakesh Kumar could not have been adjusted at Dhaliara and what was the necessity to disturb the petitioner. Learned Deputy Advocate General to have instructions in this regard. List on 14.7.2026. Till then, interim order to continue.” 4. In response thereto, today learned Additional Advocate General has handed over instructions received from Director (Health Services), to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, dated 13.07.2026, which are ordered to be taken on record and the same read as under:- “Kindly refer to your good office letter No. CWP 4736/2025 dated 17-06-2026 as also the orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court on 16-06-2026 in the above titled CWP. In this regard, it is submitted that the present transfer of the petitioner from PHC Paragpur, District Kangra, to PHC Dhaliara, vide Office Order dated 31.03.2026 (Annexure P-7), has factually been ordered on the prior approval of the competent authority, in condonation of short stay in respect of the private respondent No. 4, Sh. Rakesh Kumar as well as the petitioner, Smt. Anjana Kumari, and in relaxation of band on transfers, at the instance of the private respondent No. 4, Sh. Rakesh Kumar in a triangular manner vide which approval, the private respondent No. 4, Sh. Rakesh Kumar was approved to be 3 2026:HHC:28545 transferred from ESI Hospital Sansarpur Terrace to PHC Paragpur vice the present petitioner without TTA/JT with further transfer of the present petitioner from PHC Paragpur to PHC Dhaliara vice one Sh. Ashwani Kumar, private respondent No. 5, by further transferring Sh. Ashwani Kumar, private respondent No. 5 from PHC Dhaliara to ESI Hospital Sansarpur Terrace vice Sh. Rakesh Kumar, private respondent No. 4, with admissible TTA/JT to both the petitioner as well as the private respondent No. 5. A set of four copies of the above instructions is being enclosed and sent herewith for favour of kind information and record with the request that the same may very kindly be brought on record of the Hon'ble Court on 14-07-2026, or on next date of hearing for further directions in the matter, please.” 5. It is relevant to mention that as despite service, none had put in appearance on behalf of the private respondents, therefore, they were proceeded against ex parte. 6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the pleadings as well as latest instructions handed over by learned Deputy Advocate General, this Court is of the considered view that this petition deserves to be allowed. 7. This Court sees no logic in transferring the petitioner from Paragpur to Dhaliara, as it is an admitted case that distance between Dhaliara and Paragpur is just 10 kilometers. It is not understood, as to why respondent Rakesh Kumar could not have been adjusted at Dhaliara and the justification which is given in the instructions, does not convinces the Court that simply because it was a triangular transfer, therefore, needful had to be done. Had the petitioner been not disturbed, then obviously it would have become a 4 2026:HHC:28545 two way traffic, i.e. a transfer between Ashwani Kumar and Rakesh Kumar. Record demonstrates that Ashwani Kumar was in fact posted at Dhaliara and Rakesh Kumar was posted at Sansarpur Tarrace. Heavens would not have fallen, had the respondent/Department simply transferred Rakesh Kumar from Sansarpur Tarrace to Dhaliara and Ashwani Kumar from Dhaliara to Sansarpur Tarrace, but rather than doing so, the respondent/Department also roped in the petitioner and disturbed her after a few months. 8. Therefore, in light of the above discussion, as the impugned transfer qua the petitioner is not sustainable in the eyes of law, this petition is allowed by quashing the transfer of the petitioner from Paragpur to Dhaliara and the respondent-Authority is directed to allow the petitioner to complete her normal tenure at Paragpur. As far as the other respondents are concerned, the Department is at liberty to post Rakesh Kumar at Dhaliara. 9. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 14, 2026 (Rishi)