2026:UHC:3744 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS W PSS/ 1 2 8 8 / 2 0 2 6 Hon ’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. Mr. Tarun Prakash Singh Takuli, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Mr. K.N. Joshi, Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner is serving as Store Superintendent in Department of Training and Employment. He was transferred from Dehradun to Almora in 2024. He challenged said transfer and coordinate Bench granted interim relief in favour of the petitioner. The writ petition filed by him, however, was disposed of on 11.02.2026, permitting the petitioner to make representation against his transfer. The representation has been rejected by the Director concerned vide order dated 11.05.2026. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner is again before this Court. 4. In the writ petition, petitioner admits that he remained posted at Dehradun continuously since 2005 and upon his promotion given in 2016, he was again posted at Dehradun. After serving at Dehradun for 21 long years, which is a sugam place, petitioner became liable for transfer to some other place in hills. Thus, this Court do not find any reason to interfere with petitioner’s transfer made in 2024. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is due to retire in 2029. 2026:UHC:3744 6. Learned State Counsel, per contra, submits that in 2024, when petitioner was transferred, he was below 55 years of age, therefore, he does not fall within the exempted category. He submits that public interest demands that Government employees are transferred from one place to another at regular intervals, therefore, petitioner’s transfer was made keeping in view the public interest. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was disturbed simply with a view to accommodate respondent no. 4 at his place. 8. This Court do not find any substance in that submission also. After serving for more than two decades at Dehradun, petitioner was liable to be transferred. 9. Learned State Counsel has apprised the Court that there are only two sanctioned posts of Store Superintendent in Uttarakhand, therefore, petitioner cannot be transferred to any other place except Almora, where post of Store Superintendent exists. 10. Thus, there is no scope for interference with the impugned order dated 11.05.2026. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 15.05.2026 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e4403 d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C6E D9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.05.15 16:44:07 +05'30'