2026:HHC:7493 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3069 of 2026 Decided on: 17.03.2026 Dr. Pankaj Heer … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner: Mr. Arush Matlotia, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Notice confined to respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the transfer order dated 02.03.2026 (Annexure P-3), in terms whereof, he has been transferred from Civil Hospital, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. to Civil Hospital, Jaisinghpur, District Kangra, H.P. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has been transferred just after a stay of two years and four months to accommodate the private respondent. 3. On a query put to learned learned Counsel for the petitioner, as to where the petitioner was posted before his being posted at Nurpur, learned Counsel informs the Court that he was posted at Dharmashala and that too, for five years. 4. In light of the fact that the petitioner has been serving within a radius of 70 to 80 kilometers for the last more than 8 years 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:7493 and now also, he has just been transferred to a place which is hardly 70 to 80 kilometers away from his present place of posting and taking intro consideration the fact that the petitioner holds a State Cadre post, this Court does not finds any infirmity in the impugned transfer order and, therefore, no interference is being shown with the transfer order. 5. At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a physically disabled sister to look after and also aged father. His younger brother, on account of his employment, is serving outside the State. Therefore, the petitioner be allowed to make a representation for his adjustment at some other convenient station, if possible. 6. In light of the prayer so made by the petitioner, this petition is disposed of without interfering with the impugned transfer order, but with the observation that if after joining at the present place of posting, the petitioner does approach the Authority concerned for his adjustment at some other station, then the same be considered sympathetically. If any such representation is filed within a period of one week of joining, the same be decided within a period of three weeks as from the date of receipt thereof. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge March 17, 2026 (Rishi)