CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) and connected cases -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 117 to 120 Date of Decision :02.07.2026 117 CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) DIVIJ MOHAN AND OTHERS ...Appellants Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents 118.1 LPA-1652-2026 (O&M) GIRDHARI LAL AND OTHERS ...Appellants Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents 118.2 LPA-1653-2026 (O&M) ANANT RAM AND OTHERS ...Appellants Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents 119 LPA-1663-2026 (O&M) SURESH KUMAR AND OTHERS ...Appellants Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents 120 LPA-1664-2026 (O&M) SANDEEP AND OTHERS ...Appellants Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents RIYA 2026.07.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) and connected cases -2- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL Present: Mr. I.P.S. Kohli, Advocate for the appellants in all the appeals. * * * Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral) CM-4094-LPA-2026 The prayer in the present application is for condonation of delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal (LPA-1683-2026). Keeping in view the averments enumerated in the application, which are duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Consequently, the delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal (LPA-1683- 2026 ) is condoned. CM-4096-LPA-2026 The prayer in the present application is for placing on record the copy of reply filed by respondents No. 1 and 2 in CWP No. 30124 of 2025 and CWP No. 5510 of 2026 respectively. Keeping in view the averments mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Copy of aforesaid replies are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. LPA-1683-2026 and connected cases:- 1. The present bunch of appeals, the details of which are mentioned in the heading, involve common point of law and common set of facts, hence, they are being dealt together. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from LPA-1683-2026. RIYA 2026.07.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) and connected cases -3- 2. In the present appeal, the challenge is to the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 08.04.2026 by which, the action of the respondents in undertaking the inter-utility transfers of the appellants was considered and keeping in view the fresh policy dated 07.04.2026 framed by the State that henceforth, there will be no inter-utility transfers between various Nigams of the State of Haryana, the writ petition has been disposed of by the learned Single Judge with the directions that the Policy dated 07.04.2026 qua the restrictions upon inter-utility transfers will be applicable uniformly upon all categories of the employees and the same will not remain confined only to Group 'C' and Group 'D' employees. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that though the Policy dated 07.04.2026 has put up a complete ban on inter-utility transfers, but the said policy should be applied prospectively. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that since the appellants had submitted their applications seeking inter-utility transfer prior to the promulgation of the said policy dated 07.04.2026, their cases should have been considered under the policy prevailing at the relevant time. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the writ petitions had been filed by the petitioners/appellants prior to the promulgation of the Policy dated 07.04.2026 and the said argument raised before the learned Single Judge has not been appreciated in a correct perspective. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and have gone through the case file with his able assistance. 5. It may be noticed that the appellants are employees of different RIYA 2026.07.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) and connected cases -4- Nigam and seek transfer from one Nigam to another. Such transfers were earlier considered under the category of "inter-utility transfers". It is a settled principle of law that an employee can only work in his/her parent cadre and can not seek transfer outside the cadre and even the employer himself has no right to transfer a particular employee outside the cadre without the consent of the particular employee. In the present case, the applicants are seeking transfer outside of their parent cadre which is not a right. 6. Further, it is also settled principle of law that the transfer cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Though, prior to the month of April, 2026, the inter-utility transfers were being undertaken, but the same does not give a right to an employee to claim the same so as to bind the employer to grant the said benefit to any such employee who claims the same. It is the discretion of the employer to do the same. But now, even the said discretion has been taken away or withdrawn in view of the policy dated 07.04.2026 according to which, no inter-utility transfers shall be effected in any cadre. 7. Mere submission of an application will not give a right to the applicants (appellants herein) to claim for inter-utility transfer, especially when no such right exists with them under any service rules. Once the Government has taken a policy decision that no inter-utility transfers will be effected after the issuance of the Policy dated 07.04.2026, merely the fact that an application had already been submitted prior to the date of issuance of the new policy or that a writ petition had been filed prior thereto, cannot entitle the applicants/appellants to claim a benefit of inter-utility transfer which is contrary to the prevailing policy and especially when the said RIYA 2026.07.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) and connected cases -5- policy was framed at the request of the Court itself. Hence, the prayer made in the present set of appeals that despite the issuance of the policy dated 07.04.2026 according to which, no inter-utility transfer can be made effective, the benefit of inter-utility transfer should be extended in favour of the appellants, cannot be accepted. 8. It is a well settled law that only an existing right can be agitated before a court. In the present case, the appellants have no existing right to claim an inter-utility transfer. Moreover, no statutory rule or provision has been brought to the notice of this Court which gives a right to an employee to claim inter-utility transfer as a matter of right. 9. Keeping in view the above, the plea raised in the present bunch of appeals cannot be accepted so as to grant the benefit of inter-utility transfer to the appellants despite there being a new policy dated 07.04.2026 according to which no inter-utility transfers will be effected in any cadre. 10. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants had approached this Court on the basis of directions issued by a competent Court in earlier cases qua similarly situated employees, whereby their claims for inter-utility transfer were directed to be considered. 11 It may be noticed that such directions are always required to be complied with in accordance with the policy prevailing on the date when the claim is considered. Once, before any action could be taken pursuant to such directions, the State framed the Policy dated 07.04.2026 according to which no inter-utility transfer could be undertaken in any cadre by the State, then, the authorities are bound to consider the appellants' claims in the light of the said policy dated 07.04.2026. It may be noticed that merely a RIYA 2026.07.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CM-4094-LPA-2026, CM-4095-LPA-2026, CM-4096-LPA-2026 in/and LPA-1683-2026 (O&M) and connected cases -6- direction to "consider" a claim does not mean that the authority is required to ignore policy or grant relief contrary thereto. Hence, the contention of the appellants that the applications or writ petitions having been filed prior to the promulgation of the Policy dated 07.04.2026 entitle the appellants to consider their claim under the earlier prevailing polices, cannot be accepted. 12. Even if it is assumed for the sake of arguments that an earlier policy governing inter-utility transfers existed, such a policy can only be treated as guidelines and would not confer any enforceable right upon an employee to claim such transfer. It is a settled principle of law that any policy claiming the transfer even within the same cadre is only the guidelines, and therefore, any policy which is framed for intra-cadre transfers cannot be treated as having been extending a right to the appellants to claim such transfer. 13. No other arguments have been raised. 14. Keeping in view the above, no ground is made out for any interference by this Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 15. Accordingly, the present appeals are dismissed. 16. Pending civil miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of. 17. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case(s). (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE (AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE July 02, 2026 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes Whether reportable : No RIYA 2026.07.06 17:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document