IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.17241 of 2026 Decided on: 30th September, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shanta Kumari …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner feels aggrieved against order dated 23.09.2026 (Annexure P-8) passed by respondent No.2, rejecting her representation seeking accommodation in transfer. 2. Petitioner is serving as Trained Graduate Teacher (Medical) in the respondent-Education Department. She was transferred from GHS Kand, under complex GMSSS Dari, District Kangra to GSSS Bagshar, District Mandi under order dated 20.08.2026. Feeling aggrieved, 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 petitioner preferred CWP No.14823 of 2026, wherein it was observed that petitioner had already completed normal tenure by clubbing the previous stays alongwith his posting at the current station. In view of prayer made for the petitioner, the writ petition was disposed of with direction that petitioner may approach the concerned authorities for adjustment at some other station within a week and appropriate call would be taken on the said representation by the concerned authority sympathetically within two weeks. Till the decision of the representation, the petitioner was not to be compelled to join the station to which she was transferred and she was to avail leave of the kind due to her. Pursuant to the above directions, petitioner’s representation was considered and rejected by respondent No.2 on 23.09.2026. 3. While dismissing petitioner’s representation, respondent No.2 has observed in the impugned order that petitioner has been transferred on completion of her normal tenure by clubbing her previous stay within the prescribed radius and that petitioner cannot claim her posting at a particular place of her choice as a matter of right. 3 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed that the petitioner has remained posted w.e.f. 12.02.2021 at the stations, which are at a distance of less than 30 kilometers. Petitioner belongs to State Cadre and under order dated 20.08.2026, was transferred to GSSS Bagshar, District Mandi. She has completed more than five years of stay in and around her current place of posting. There is no vested right in the petitioner to seek transfer to a place of her preference. No special circumstance was also urged by learned counsel for the petitioner for petitioner's transfer to a place of her preference. In the given facts and circumstances, no case was made out for posting the petitioner to a place of her choice. Respondent No.2, therefore, did not commit any illegality in rejecting petitioner’s prayer for her adjustment against a particular station as the petitioner did not have any vested right to claim such posting. 5. In view of above, the present writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 30, 2026 Judge Mukesh