Allowed¶13

Pawan Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Himachal Pradesh HC11 Mar 2026CWP/2797/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer policy; hard area / difficult area posting; completion of normal tenure; shifting incumbent out after tenure; punishment posting; tribal area rotation; GSSS Kathog, Distt. Mandi; rejection of transfer representation quashed; Order dated 31.01.2026 (Annexure P-5); direction to transfer within four weeks; replacement posting after academic session; Himachal Pradesh High Court; CWP No.2797 of 2026; education department employee transfer.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; Order dated 31.01.2026 (Annexure P-5) quashed and set aside; respondents directed to shift the petitioner out of his present place of posting within four weeks and post some other incumbent in his place; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, disposed of accordingly. ¶13

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Hp and Others — Himachal Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the rejection of the petitioner's request for transfer out of the hard/difficult-area station (GSSS Kathog, Distt. Mandi) after completion of his normal tenure was arbitrary and sustainable in law.

¶7

Court's answer

Rejection of the petitioner's representation for transfer after completion of normal tenure in the hard area is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Once an incumbent has completed his normal tenure in a hard area, the employer must transfer him out of that area and post some other incumbent in his place, which may be done after completion of the academic session.

¶12

Key takeaways

If the Department does not shift incumbents out of hard and tribal areas upon completion of normal tenure, it will become difficult to find incumbents willing to serve in such areas, as such postings would be construed as punishment postings with no certainty of being shifted out after tenure.obiter¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Petitioner, posted at GSSS Kathog, Distt. Mandi (a difficult area), sought transfer on the ground that he had completed his normal tenure at that station; the Authority rejected the request by Order dated 31.01.2026 (Annexure P-5). The Court held the rejection unsustainable in law: once normal tenure in a hard area is completed, the employer must shift the incumbent out and post a replacement, which may be after completion of the academic session. It further observed that failure to rotate incumbents out of hard and tribal areas upon completion of tenure would make such postings punishment postings and make it difficult to find staff willing to serve there. The writ petition was allowed; the rejecting order was quashed and set aside; the respondents were directed to shift the petitioner within four weeks and post another incumbent in his place; pending miscellaneous applications stood disposed of accordingly.

¶1

2026:HHC:6647

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No.2797 of 2026 Decided on: 11.03.2026 Pawan Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?¹ Yes ____________________________________________________ _ For the petitioner: Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General.

¶4

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

¶5

Notice. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of respondents.

¶6

The petitioner is aggrieved by Order dated 31.01.2026 (Annexure P-5), in terms whereof, his request of transfer from his present place of posting i.e. GSSS Kathog, Distt. Mandi, which is a difficult area, on the ground that he has already completed normal tenure at the said station has been rejected.

¶7

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that rejection of the case of the petitioner is completly arbitrary. He submits that it is the duty of the employer to ensure that after completion of normal tenure in hard area an incumbent is shifted out of that area, but in the present case needful is not being done by the Authorities concerned.

¶8

On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the order is self-speaking, as to why the petitioner could not transferred. He submits that the transfer of the petitioner would have adversely affected the studies of his children, therefore, 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶9

¶10

2026:HHC:6647

¶11

the transfer has not been done.

¶12

This Court is of the considered view that rejection of the representation of the petitioner is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Once the petitioner has completed his normal tenure in the hard area, the employer to transfer him out of that area and post some other incumbent in his place may be after completion of academic session. It is not borne out from the order passed by the Authority that there is none in the entire State who can be posted in place of the petitioner. In fact, if the Department does not comes out with a positive demeanor, in terms whereof, the incumbents who are posted in hard areas and tribal areas, are shifted out of these areas upon completion of normal tenure, then it would be difficult for the Department to find incumbents for posting in these areas, because posting in these areas shall be construed as a punishment posting, because there will be no certainty in the employee that post completion of the tenure, he/ she will be shifted out of the area.

¶13

Accordingly, in light of above observations, this writ petition is allowed. Order dated 31.01.2026 (Annexure P-5) is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to shift the petitioner out of his present place of posting within four weeks from today and post some other incumbent in his place. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶14

March 11, 2026 (Rishi)

Pawan Kumar v. State of Hp and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar v. 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anamika Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Dinesh Vs the State of Hp and Others

Kuldeep Singh Vs the State of Hp and Others

Santosh Kumari Vs the State of Hp and Others

Ravinder Kumar Vs State of Hp and Another

Surjan Singh Vs the Hptdcl and Others