IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 16472 of 2026. Decided on : 22 nd September , 2026 Ajay Kumar Badrel ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Anr. ....Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Petitioner is serving as District Programme Officer in the respondent-Social Justice and Empowerment Department. While serving as such at Mandi, he preferred a representation on 23.05.2026 seeking transfer to Shimla District. The reason for making this prayer, as reflected in the representation, was as under: “I am a visually blind officer and presently posted in Mandi, which is located approximately 200 kilometers away from my home in Shimla District. I have already completed two years of service in mandi. Due to my medical condition and the challenges involved in commuting and living independently so far from my family, it has become increasingly difficult to manage my duties effectively while ensuring my health and will-being. I also wish to submit that I own a flat in Shimla city, which is well- equipped to support my needs. A posting in Shimla would enable me to fulfill my responsibilities more effectively and safely, while 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 being closer to necessary support systems, including family and healthcare.” 2. In the aforesaid representation, the petitioner had held out that he was a visually blind officer posted in Mandi at a distance of 200 km away from his home in Shimla District; That he had already completed two years of service in Mandi; Due to his medical conditions and challenges involved in commuting and living independently away from his family, it was becoming increasingly difficult for him to manage his duties effectively while ensuring his health and well-being. Petitioner also mentioned therein that he owned a flat in Shimla city and therefore made request to transfer him from Mandi to Shimla on compassionate and humanitarian grounds. Apparently, the respondents did not respond to the aforesaid representation. The petitioner accordingly sent a reminder on 08.04.2026 to consider his request for transfer from Mandi to Shimla, highlighting therein the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Rules/Policy for persons suffering with benchmark disabilities. CWP No. 6776 of 2026 instituted by the petitioner in this regard was disposed of on 06.05.2026 with directions to the respondents to consider his representation sympathetically by passing speaking order within the timelines mentioned therein. Thereafter, the respondents issued notification on 16.09.2026 (Annexure 3 P-7) adjusting the petitioner in the Directorate of Women and Child Development at Shimla with immediate effect in public interest. 3. Still not satisfied, petitioner preferred representation on 16.09.2026 itself, claiming that he was required to be transferred on regular basis against sanctioned post of District Programme Officer and should not be adjusted in the Directorate of Women and Child Development at Shimla; That his salary should not be drawn against the post of District Programme Officer, Lahaul & Spiti or any other district. The relevant portion of the representation, which is also his grievance in this writ petition, reads as under: “Pursuant to the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court in CWP No. 6776/2026, I was granted a personal hearing on 07.07.2026 at 11.30 AM before the Secretary (SJ&E) Government of Himachal Pradesh, which I duly attended. During the hearing, I specifically requested that I may be transferred on regular basis against the sanctioned post of District Programme Officer, Shimla, and that my case should not be disposed of by way of adjustment/deputation/deployment at the Directorate, Shimla against the post of DPO Lahaul & Spiti or any other district. Further, the Department of Personnel has issued instructions dated 17.07.2026 in compliance with the judgment in CWPIL No. 31/2024 (Vipin Kumar Guleria vs. State of H.P. ), stating that the practice of deputation/deployment in place of regular posting needs to be curbed and the period of deputation/deployment shall be recorded separately from the parent place of posting for transfer, tenure and posting-related benefits.” 4 In the aforesaid background, petitioner has instituted this writ petition seeking following substantive reliefs: “(i) That Writ in the nature of Certiorari may kindly be issued by quashing impugned notification dated 16.09.2026. (ii) That Writ of in the nature of Mandamus may kindly be issued by directing the respondents to transfer the petitioner sympathetically from the present place of posting i.e. District Programme Officer, District Mandi H.P. to District Programme Officer District Shimla, H.P. as the petitioner is 100% visually impaired person.” 4. Following order was passed in this matter on 21.09.2026: “Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. Petitioner’s apprehensions are that he has only been adjusted in the Directorate of Women and Child Development at Shimla with salary drawable from the post of DPO Lahaul & Spiti or any other district. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that instead of adjustment, the petitioner should have been transferred at Shimla. Learned Assistant Advocate General to have instructions in the matter. List on 22.09.2026.” The above order was passed in view of the apprehensions expressed for the petitioner by his learned counsel that petitioner had only been adjusted in the Directorate of Women and Child Development at Shimla with salary drawable from the post of DPO, Lahaul & Spiti or any other district. The petitioner had apprehended that he would be 5 transferred again without letting him complete three years in terms of notification dated 16.09.2026. Pursuant to the above order, learned Assistant Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 22.09.2026 from Secretary (Social Justice & Empowerment) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The relevant portion of office instructions is as under: “In this regard it is submitted that while deciding the representation of the petitioner as per the Hon'ble High Court order dated 6-5-2026 passed in CWP No. 6776/2026 , the following factors were taken in to consideration: 1. As per the representation, the petitioner is 100% visually disabled and Shimla being the capital of the state makes the work profile of DPO Shimla very hectic, overburden and challenging. 2. His parents made consistent requests for transfer of the petitioner to Shimla. 3. To avoid the petitioner from facing the unnecessary burden and over load of work. 4. To provide him differently abled environment, as already two differently abled employees are working in the Directorate of WCD. Thus making the arrangements above is a bonafide, beneficial and protective measures in the interest of petitioner. It is also clarified that the petitioner will not be disturbed from the Directorate of Women and Child Development before the completion of his normal tenure.” In terms of the above office instructions, the petitioner shall not be disturbed from Directorate of Women and Child Development before completion of his normal tenure. Thus, the office instructions have 6 allayed the fear or apprehension of the petitioner of his being disturbed from the Directorate before the completion of normal tenure. The respondents as employer is not only to consider and safeguard the interest and rights of its employees suffering from benchmark disabilities, but is also to run the department. The petitioner's representation seeking transfer from Mandi to Shimla has been favourably considered by the respondent department and he has accordingly been posted in Shimla in the Directorate with assurance that he will not be disturbed before completion of his normal tenure. The grievance of the petitioner thus stands redressed. In so far as petitioner's posting anywhere else in Shimla is concerned, qua that aspect, the only observation that can be made at this stage is that as and when some vacancy for the adjustment of petitioner in Shimla becomes available, where according to the respondents, the petitioner can be posted, appropriate call in that regard be taken for that purpose at the relevant time. With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 22nd September, 2026. (jai)