Inderjeet Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Inderjeet Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; impugned transfer order (Annexure P-4, dated 20.01.2026) quashed and set aside; petitioner permitted to complete his normal tenure at HPPWD Division Karsog; Respondent No. 5 (Smt. Indu Sharma) instructed to continue at the station where she was serving before the impugned transfer order; pending miscellaneous application(s) disposed of accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the petitioner's transfer (Annexure P-4 dated 20.01.2026, moving him from HPPWD Division Karsog to HPPWD Division Seraj at Janjheli just after a stay of one year and two months) should succeed. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

This Court held that, since the petitioner's transfer rested on a DO note (as conceded in the respondents' instructions dated 21.04.2026), it was evident that the transfer was not due to administrative exigency or in public interest — particularly as the petitioner was disturbed after a stay of one year and two months at his then place of posting.

Key takeaways

On that footing, the Court allowed the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned transfer order (Annexure P-4, dated 20.01.2026).ratio¶23
The respondents were directed to allow the petitioner to complete his normal tenure at his present place of posting (HPPWD Division Karsog).ratio¶26
The private respondent (Respondent No. 5, Smt. Indu Sharma) was ordered to be instructed to continue at the station at which she was serving immediately before issuance of the impugned transfer order.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA (Ajay Mohan Goel, J., oral) — CWP No. 1400 of 2026, decided 22.04.2026 (neutral citation 2026:HHC:12851). Sh. Inderjeet challenged his transfer (Annexure P-4, dated 20.01.2026) from HPPWD Division Karsog to HPPWD Division Seraj at Janjheli, District Mandi, effected in place of Respondent No. 5 (Smt. Indu Sharma) after a stay of barely one year and two months. With the private respondent proceeded against ex parte (07.04.2026) and no reply filed, the Advocate General's instructions dated 21.04.2026 conceded that Respondent No. 5 had 'managed' DO notes to secure her own transfers (out of Karsog vide order dated 10.6.2025, and recently back from Seraj to Karsog), following which the petitioner had been shifted to Seraj/Janjheli. Holding that the transfer was thus based on a DO note and not on administrative exigency or public interest, the Court allowed the petition, quashed and set aside the impugned transfer order, directed that the petitioner be allowed to complete his normal tenure at his present station, and instructed the private respondent to continue at the station she occupied before the impugned order. Pending miscellaneous applications disposed of accordingly. No statutory provision or precedent relied upon.

2026:HHC:12851

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 1400 of 2026 Decided on: 22.04.2026 Sh. Inderjeet … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹

___________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Devender Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rahul Thakur, Deputy Advocate General.

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the transfer order Annexure P-4, dated 20.01.2026, in terms whereof, the petitioner has been transferred from HPPWD Division Karsog to HPPWD Division Seraj at Janjheli, District Mandi, H.P. in place of the private respondents, just after a stay of one year and two months at his present place of posting.

As the private respondent did put in appearance before the Court despite service, she has been proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 07.04.2026. As despite reasonable opportunities having been granted, no reply has been filed to the petition, on 16.04.2026, the following order was passed by the Court:-

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

2

2026:HHC:12851

“Despite opportunities granted, reply to the petition has still not been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has again submitted that whereas the petitioner has been transferred from the present place of posting just after the completion of an year’s stay at the said station, there are people stationed in Karsog as pointed out in Para-10 of the petition, who are not been transferred despite their long stay at the said station.

Learned Additional Advocate General to have specific instructions in this regard as to why the petitioner has been disturbed just after a stay of about 1 year and 2 months and why the private respondent was accommodated back to Karsog just after six months. List on 22.04.2026.”

Today, learned Advocate General has filed instructions dated 21.04.2026, relevant portion whereof reads as under:-

“I have the honor to invite your kind attention towards subject cited matter which has been ordered to be listed on 22.4.2026 before the Hon'ble High Court of HP.

In this behalf it is respectfully submitted that the petitioner has filed present writ petition against impugned transfer order dated 20.1.2026 Annexure P-4. In this behalf it is respectfully submitted that the petitioner has been transferred from HPPWD Division Karsog to HPPWD Division Seraj at Janjehli vice Smt. Indu Sharma respondent NO. 5

3

2026:HHC:12851

with prior approval of competent authority. So far as the directions passed by Hon'ble Court dated 16.4.2026 is concerned, it is submitted that the respondent NO. 5 smt. Indu Sharma has previously managed the DO note in respect of her transfer from HPPWD Division Karsog to HPPWD Division Seraj and as such she was transferred vide order dated 10.6.2025. Recently she has again managed the DO Note for her transfer from HPPWD Division Seraj to HPPWD Division Karsog. The matter was taken up with the competent authority and subsequently the petitioner has been transferred to HPPWD Division Seraj at Janjehli vide order dated 20.01.2026 Annexure P-4.

You are, therefore, requested to kindly apprise the Hon'ble Court accordingly on the date of hearing and pray for at least four weeks further time to file reply on behalf of respondents please.”

In terms of the instructions, the stand of the respondents is that the transfer of the petitioner against the private respondent is on the basis of DO note. Therefore, as it is evident that the transfer of the petitioner is not due to administrative exigency or in public interest, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner was disturbed after a stay of one year and two months at the present place of posting, this petition is allowed and the impugned transfer order (Annexure P-4) is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to complete

4

2026:HHC:12851

normal tenure at the present place of posting. As far as the private respondent is concerned, she be instructed to continue at the station at which she was serving before the issuance of the impugned transfer order. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

April 22, 2026 (narender)