Sumit Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.17325 of 2025 Date of Decision: 07.11.2025

__________________________________________________________ Sumit Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ For the Petitioner: Mr. Bonit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State.

¶4

Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral):

¶5

Petitioner herein, who at present is working as JBT at GPS, Sargha, District Kullu, H.P., which is a hard area, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking directions to respondents to transfer him from afore station to one of the stations of his choice, as detailed in Para 5 of the petition.

¶6

It is averred in the petition, which is duly supported by way of affidavit, that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, which is a hard area and as such, he is entitled to seek transfer from the present place of posting to one of the stations of his choice, as detailed in Para 5 of the petition.

¶7

Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity

¶8

to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶9

2

¶10

represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar fairly states that petitioner may be asked to submit representation, specifying therein five stations of his choice, enabling respondents to consider his case for transfer in terms of Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh.

¶11

Since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting in hard area, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer, after his/her having completed normal tenure of posting in hard area, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation within a period of ten days, detailing therein five stations of his choice, where he can be posted on account of completion of normal tenure of posting in hard area, which in-turn shall be decided by the competent authority expeditiously, preferably, within a period of four weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereupon taking note of Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh.

¶12

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

¶13

(Sandeep Sharma), Judge

¶14

November 07, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)

Sumit Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit Kumar v. the State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manisha Singh Vs the State of Hp and Others

Abhishek Choudhary Vs the State of Hp and Others

Suraj Singh Vs Hrtc and Others

Anupama Makhaik Vs the State of Hp and Others

Rakesh Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Another

Subhash Chand Vs the State of Hp and Others