IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.11635 of 2026 Decided on 06th August, 2026 Surender Kumar …Petitioner Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and another …Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Ravinder Thakur, Advocate. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “1. A writ of certiorari may kindly be issued to quash and set aside order dated 24.06.2026 (Annexure P-6) in the interest of justice. 2. A writ of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the respondents to transfer the petitioner from the present place of posting to a softer station keeping in view the medical condition of the petitioner in the interest of justice.” 2. In terms of Annexure P-6, the request of the petitioner for his transfer from his present place of posting on the ground of his hearing impairment has been rejected. 2 3. On the last date of hearing, this Court had passed the following order:- “CMP No.18947 of 2026 This application is disposed of by taking on record the documents appended with the petition. CWP No.11635 of 2026 Issue notice. Mr. Ravinder Thakur, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. As prayed for, list on 06.08.2026. Learned counsel for the respondents to have instructions as to why the petitioner cannot be accommodated at the station of his choice in light of the fact that he is suffering from a physical disability and in terms of the transfer policy, there is a concession to handicapped employees given as per Clause 5.3 thereof.” 4. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner has handed over instructions, in terms whereof, inter alia, the physical disability from which the petitioner is suffering from is only 40%, whereas, as per the transfer policy of the Board, concession to handicapped employees is given to those who have 60% and above physical disability. 5. Be that as it may, as it is not in dispute that the petitioner is physically disabled, because, in terms of the averments made in the writ petition, he was appointed as Junior Engineer (Mechanical) under the PWD quota, the stand of the Board that concession to handicap employees is applicable only to those who have 60% or more physical disability cannot be 3 accepted. In light of the fact that the petitioner was appointed under the PWD quota, the Board has to offer the concession to him also as far his posting is concerned. 6. In the light of the fact that the contention of the petitioner, as has been urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that on account of his hearing impairment, he is having an issue while serving at the present station because of the altitude, etc., this petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner be transferred by the respondent-Board to a non- tribal area, but, it is clarified that the place at which the petitioner is to be posted/appointed by way of transfer shall be at the discretion of the Board and the Board, of course, will see its administrative convenience while ordering the transfer of the petitioner. Needful be done within four weeks from today. 7. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 06, 2026 (Vinod)