Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CWP No.3190 of 2026
Decided on 18th March, 2026 Vipan Kumar
…Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another
…Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Ms. Madhurika Sekhon, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional
Advocate General.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
Issue notice. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
2.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- (i)
“That the impugned office order dated 13.03.2026 (Annexure P-1) whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be transferred from the office of Sub Divisional Soil Conservation Officer, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, H.P., to the office of Sub Divisional Soil Conservation Officer, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P., may kindly be quashed and set aside.
2
(ii) That the respondents kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to discharge his duties at present place of posting or in the alternative, the respondents may kindly be directed to transfer the petitioner against vacant post of Junior Draughtsman either in District Solan, or in District Sirmour, H.P.”
3.
Having heard Ms. Madhurika Sekhon, learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that no interference is required with the transfer order of the petitioner.
4.
In terms of the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner since his initial appointment on contract basis in the month of January, 2022 has been serving at Rajgarh, where his services were regularized also later on. Thus, the transfer of the petitioner from Rajgarh to Palampur is after more than 4 years stay at Rajgarh. Besides this, Palampur is neither a hard area nor a difficult area and, therefore also, the petitioner cannot make any grievance with regard to his posting at Palampur and, accordingly, as this Court finds no reason to interfere with the transfer order, the present petition is dismissed.
3
5.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge March 18, 2026 (Vinod)