IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.418 of 2026 Decided on: 7th January, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Naresh Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Yudhbir Singh Thakur and Mr. Ayush Chauhan, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Y.P.S. Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioner was serving as Fruit Technologist at Shamshi, District Kullu. On 30.12.2025, he was transferred as Deputy Director of Horticulture, Mandi, District Mandi. Petitioner’s such transfer was vice respondent No.3, who was brought in his place. Petitioner complied with the transfer order and joined as Deputy Director Horticulture, Mandi on 31.12.2025. His grievance in the instant petition is to the notification of even date, i.e. 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-3), whereby the respondents cancelled the vice-versa transfer of the petitioner and respondent No.3. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 2. Learned Additional Advocate General has produced the record. As per the record, vice-versa transfer of the petitioner and respondent No.3 was ordered on 30.12.2025 on the basis of a D.O. note issued by the Revenue, Hort., T.D. and R.P.G. Minister. The case record also reflects that there was no mutual consent for the impugned vice-versa transfer of the petitioner and respondent No.3. Accordingly, the higher authorities of the respondent-Department ordered for cancelling the vice- versa transfer order of the petitioner and respondent No.3, which resulted in issuance of the impugned notification dated 31.12.2025. Since the order sought to be implemented by the petitioner was not based upon an independent exercise carried out by the Administrative Head/Employer of the petitioner, hence, the impugned notification dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-3) does not call for any interference. This writ petition, therefore, lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua January 07, 2026 Judge Mukesh