UKHC010105672026 2026:UHC:4981 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Single No. 1599 of 2026 17 June, 2026 Sunil Chaudhary --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Others --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned D.A.G. for the State of Uttarakhand/respondents. Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has challenged the impugned transfer order dated 20.04.2026 issued by respondent No.3, whereby, he was transferred from Haridwar to Chamoli and subsequent order dated 09.06.2026 (Annexure Nos.1 and 2 to the writ petition). 2. Petitioner has challenged the impugned transfer order mainly on the ground that he is suffering from heart disease and two stunts were placed in the heart of petitioner in 2017 and since 2017 he was under regular medical treatment. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the Doctor has advised the petitioner to avoid high altitude, extreme cold area and remote area and further to work in place where nearby cardiac facilities are available. 4. It is further contended by him that petitioner made several representations to the respondents alleging his grievances after issuance of impugned transfer, but the same are still pending consideration. It is further UKHC010105672026 2026:UHC:4981 2 contended that vide order dated 09.06.2026, petitioner is directed to join the transferred place on 23.06.2026. 5. Having gone through the submission made by learned counsel for petitioner, this Court is not convinced with it, as transfer is exigency of the service, therefore, no case is made out. 6. At this, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the representation dated 10.06.2026 annexed as Annexure No.6, is pending with respondent No.3 and a direction be issued to respondent No.3 to decide the said representation moved by the petitioner within stipulated period, keeping in view his heart problem. 7. Learned State Counsel has no objection if such a direction be issued by this Court. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is finally disposed of. Respondent No.3 is directed to decide the representation moved by the petitioner dated 10.06.2026 (Annexure No.6) within a period of 10 days from today, by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, keeping in view the health condition of petitioner. 9. Pending application also stands disposed of. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 17.06.2026 PN