Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/19833/2026 on 3 November 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.19833 of 2026
Decided on: 3rd November, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lok Raj
…..Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Limited and others
.....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Shubham Sood, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge
Notice. Mr. Virender Singh Kanwar, learned counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. Petitioner is serving as Lineman at Electrical Sub-Division Barot of the respondent-HPSEB Limited under Electrical Division, Jogindernagar, District Mandi. It is the case of the petitioner that the area of his posting falls under hard area in terms of the applicable policy. He has completed his normal tenure at the aforesaid station. For 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes.
that reason and also on account of certain adverse family circumstances coupled with the medical condition of his child, petitioner preferred a representation (Annexure P-4 Colly.), through proper channel, to respondent No.1 seeking his transfer.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has indicated certain stations in para 10 of the writ petition, where he can be accommodated by the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.1/ competent authority is directed to consider the aforesaid representation keeping in view the stations indicated by him in para 10 of the petition.
4. Looking to the limited grievance of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.1/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-4 Colly.) in accordance with law and keeping in view the applicable transfer policy as well as the stations opted for by the petitioner in paragraph 10 of the writ petition, within a period of four weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua November 03, 2026
Judge Mukesh