Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/19385/2026 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. 19385/2026
Decided on: 29.10.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meena Devi
…..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: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
The petitioner is serving as Drawing Master and admittedly belongs to the State cadre. She is currently serving at Government High School, Kandar, U/C GSSS Dhawal, Mandi, District Mandi. Her case is that she has given consent for mutual transfer vice one Shri Chuni Lal, who is serving as Drawing Master at GHS Dhaban U/C GSSS Lohara, Mandi, District Mandi, but the said mutual consent is not being looked into by the respondents.
2. Firstly, there is no document on record to suggest that such mutual consent, as alleged, was furnished by the petitioner and handed over to the competent authority. Secondly, Shri Chuni
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 15:49:17 :::CIS
2 Lal, the alleged other consenting party, has not joined the petitioner in this writ petition. Thirdly, the petitioner does not have any vested right to claim mutual transfer merely because another employee has given consent for his mutual transfer vice the petitioner. Fourthly, to a query of the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, though belonging to the State cadre, has remained posted either in District Mandi or in the bordering areas around District Bilaspur, i.e., the place to which she belongs, throughout her entire service career till date.
3. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any good ground to entertain this writ petition for the relief claimed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge
29th October, 2026 rohit High Court of H.P. ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2026 15:49:17 :::CIS