2026:UHC:3626-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY 12th May, 2026 Special Appeal No. 151 of 2026 Narendra Malik ------Appellant Versus Vice Chancellor, Gurukul Kangri (Deemed to be University), Haridwar and others -----Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel for the respondents. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT: (per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.) 1. The present intra court appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 28.04.2026, whereby the Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1089 of 2026, filed by the petitioner challenging the order of his transfer dated 28.02.2026 from Faculty of Engineering & Technology (FET) University at Haridwar to Kanya Gurukul Campus at Dehradun has been dismissed observing that the petitioner holds a transferable post and since transfer has been effected in terms of conditions of service, therefore, it cannot be interfered with. 1 2026:UHC:3626-DB 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no transfer policy in the University, therefore, he was wrongly transferred. He also submits that the petitioner was General Secretary of the Employees Association of the University and the transfer was based on mala fide considerations. 3. It is noteworthy that earlier, the petitioner was transferred to Kanya Gurukul Campus at Haridwar, and in respect whereof, he had no grievance but subsequently, the transfer order was modified and he was transferred to Kanya Gurukul Campus, Dehradun and aggrieved whereby he preferred Writ Petition (S/S) No. 837 of 2026. The said writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make representation. The representation filed by the petitioner was not accepted and this led to filing the second writ petition challenging the transfer order. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has not placed any material on record to show that under the terms of appointment, the petitioner does not hold a transferable post. Even the appointment letter has not been filed. Learned Single Judge has taken into 2 2026:UHC:3626-DB consideration several factors while declining to interfere with the transfer order. 5. Before parting, we re-emphasize that when the petitioner was earlier transferred to Haridwar, he had no grievance against the same, but the transfer order was challenged only after he was transferred to Dehradun. For the said reason also, we find no force in the contention that the service of the petitioner was not transferrable. 6. We fully concur with view taken by the learned Single Judge. The appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. 7. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. (MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.) (SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 12.05.2026 Kaushal 3