Hari Lal Vs State of Hp and Anr.

2025:HHC:28801

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.13717 of 2025 Date of Decision: 26.08.2025

__________________________________________________________ Hari Lal …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan & Ms. Aafreen Kaushal, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State.

¶5

____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶6

Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Lecturer (Physical Education/DPE), is aggrieved of order dated 07.08.2025 (Annexure P-4), passed by Director, School Education, Himachal Pradesh, in compliance to the order dated 08.07.2025, passed by this Court in CWP No.10899 of 2025, titled Hari Lal Vs. State of H.P. and Others, whereby respondents have considered the representation of the petitioner, but again directed him to join the transferred station i.e. Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra, H.P. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Ms. Aafreen Kaushal, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that once this Court vide order dated 08.07.2025 had already quashed the order dated

¶7

1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶8

2025:HHC:28801

¶9

2

¶10

04.06.2025, whereby petitioner was transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Sechunala, District Chamba to Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra, there was no occasion, if any, for respondents to again transfer him to Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra.

¶11

While putting in appearance on behalf of respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, states that since no posts of Lecturer (Physical Education/DPE) are lying vacant at the Schools of choice given by the petitioner, Director, School Education, had no option but to direct the petitioner to join at the transferred station i.e. Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra. He further states that petitioner cannot have any grouse with regard to his transfer for the reason that he has been transferred from hard area to soft area.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused material available on record, this Court finds that being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 04.06.2025, whereby petitioner was transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Sechunala, District Chamba to Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra, petitioner approached this Court by way of CWP No.10899 of 2025, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 08.07.2025, in following terms:

¶13

“7. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly the same is allowed. Impugned order

¶14

2025:HHC:28801

¶15

3

¶16

dated 04.06.2025 is quashed and set-aside, qua the petitioner only, reserving liberty to the respondents to transfer the petitioner from the present place of posting to a station of choice to the petitioner, which in any eventuality, shall be furnished by him within a period of two weeks to the competent authority. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate order.”

¶17

In terms of aforesaid judgment, this Court while setting aside the transfer order dated 04.06.2025, reserved liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the respondents, indicating therein stations of his choice. Though petitioner gave stations of his choice, but he could not be transferred to those stations, on account of the fact that they were not vacant. Since this Court had already quashed and set aside the order dated 04.06.2025, whereby petitioner was transferred from Government Senior Secondary School, Sechunala, District Chamba to Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra, there was no occasion, if any, for Director, School Education, to again direct the petitioner to join at the transferred station i.e. Government Senior Secondary School, Nandrool, District Kangra, rather he ought to have called upon the petitioner to point-out some other vacant stations, where he could be posted, in terms of order dated 08.07.2025, passed by this Court in earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner.

¶18

Moreover, this Court finds that petitioner while filing representation, in terms of order dated 08.07.2025, gave a list of Schools, where persons with longer stay stood posted, if it is so, in that eventuality, Director, School Education, ought to have adjusted the

¶19

2025:HHC:28801

¶20

4

¶21

petitioner in that School, after transferring the Teacher with longer stay or person who had already completed normal tenure of posting, but interestingly, Director, School Education, straightaway without verifying the factual aspect of the matter, proceeded to reject the representation of the petitioner.

¶22

Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly the same is allowed. Impugned order dated 07.08.2025 (Annexure P-4) is quashed and set aside with the direction to respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner afresh, taking note of observations made hereinabove. Needful in terms of instant judgment shall be done expeditiously, preferably, within a period of ten days.

¶23

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶24

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

¶25

August 26, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)

Hari Lal v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Lal v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neetu Devi Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Renu Bala Vs Rajesh Sharma

Ravinder Kumar Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others

Narinder Kumar Vs Nipun Jindal

Reema Devi Vs State of Hp and Ors.