IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.19729 of 2026 Date of Decision: 07.01.2026 _______________________________________________________ Pankaj Kumar Lakhanpal …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Parav Sharma & Ms. Vishali Lakhanpal, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Ravi Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy Advocates General, for the respondent-State. Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Veterinary Officer at Veterinary Hospital, Rail, Tehsil Nadaun, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of order dated 10.12.2025(Annexure P-2), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Veterinary Hospital Lagru, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner is that he has been not permitted to complete his normal tenure of posting at present 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 place of posting, rather has been transferred within short period of two years. 3. Pursuant to the notice issued in the instant proceedings, Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2. He states that petitioner has been working at present place of posting for more than two years and as such, cannot be claimed to have been transferred within short span. 4. Respondent-State has filed reply, perusal whereof nowhere disputes factum with regard to petitioner’s deployment at present place of posting for the last two years. It is averred in the reply that petitioner, being Class-1 Officer, can be transferred at any point of time and he is not entitled to take shelter of transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Submission raised at the behest of the respondent-State with regard to non- applicability of transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh that in case of Class-1 Officer is wholly untenable in light of judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.1863 of 2018, titled as Rattan Chand Vs. State of H.P. & others, wherein it has been held as under:- “The petitioner is working as a Principal in Government Senior Secondary School. He was transferred to Government Senior Secondary School, Alampur, District Kangra, H.P in September 2017. After a few months i.e. on 24th May, 2018, he was transferred to Government Senior Secondary School(Girl) at Anni, District Kullu. He challenged that transfer order before the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal. His Original Application was disposed of with liberty to 3 the petitioner to make a representation which was directed to be considered and disposed of. Pursuant to order dated 29th May, 2018 of the Tribunal, the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh passed the order dated 19th July, 2018, according to which the petitioner being a Class-I Gazetted Officer “can be transferred to any where in the State in exigency of the service on administrative grounds…...”. In our considered view, order dated 19th July, 2018 of the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh does not meet with the requirement of principles of fair and just play. Possessing power to transfer Class-I Gazetted Officer is one thing and the manner in which such power is exercised is altogether different. Every official, whether class-IV or Class-I, is expected to remain posted for an ordinary tenure of three years or so save where there exist administrative grounds, exigency or public interest demanding his premature transfer. No such reasons find mention in the order of the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The same is accordingly set aside and the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Secretary (Education) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to re-consider the petitioner’s request sympathetically for his posting preferably against a vacant post in District Kangra or at a place which is near to his home town. In case, the petitioner is required to be posted at a place which is already occupied by an incumbent, such incumbent should also not be transferred prematurely. In other words, uniform policy pattern be adopted as far as possible in the matter of administrative transfers. An appropriate decision be taken within two weeks.” 5. Once it is not in dispute that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, order impugned in the instant proceedings needs to be interfered with. However, having taken note of the fact that petitioner herein shall be completing three years at present place of posting in another 6-7 months, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner as well as private respondent to file representation to the competent authority for their adjustment at a convenient station, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. Ordered 4 accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as private respondent and pass appropriate orders. Till the time representations, if any, filed in terms of instant order are not decided by the competent authority, petitioner as well as private respondent shall continue to work at their respective places of posting. Pending applications, if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge January 07,2026 (shankar)