Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/19378/2026 on 29 October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWP No. 19378/2026
Decided on: 29.10.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jagdish
…..Petitioner
Versus
State of H.P. and Ors.
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Salochna Rana, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Ms. Seema Sharma, Deputy Advocate General ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
The petitioner is serving as Drawing Master at Government Senior Secondary School Lapas (Chuhar Ghati) School Cluster, Government Senior Secondary School Barot, Education Block Drang-I, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi. His case is that the place where he is serving falls under the Sub- Cadre/Hard Area. As per the applicable transfer policy, on completion of the requisite tenure at the aforesaid station/Sub- Cadre/Hard Station, he preferred a representation on 06.09.2026 (Annexure P-1) to respondent No. 2, however, the said representation has not been considered and decided till date.
1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2026 15:49:02 :::CIS
2
2. Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that the aforesaid representation mentions only two places of preference opted for by the petitioner, whereas the requirement under the applicable policy is for five stations.
3. In view of above, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be content if he is permitted to file a fresh representation to respondent No. 2/Competent Authority, with a direction to the said respondent/Competent Authority to decide the same within a time-bound schedule.
4. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a fresh representation to respondent No. 2/Competent Authority, in accordance with law and the applicable transfer policy, within two weeks from today. In case such representation is so preferred, the same shall be considered and decided by the said respondent/Competent Authority within four weeks thereafter, in accordance with law and keeping in view the applicable transfer policy. The decision so arrived at shall be communicated to the petitioner. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua October 29, 2026
Judge rohit
High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2026 15:49:02 :::CIS