SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 9737

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
VIKRAM SINGH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS – Respondent
CWP/21123/2025



Petitioner Advocates:Ashwani Kumar Negi ,Respondent Advocate: AG

##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.21123 of 2025

Date of Decision: 31.12.2025

_____________________________________________________________________

Vikram Singh

……...Petitioner

Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.

…....Respondents

Coram

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?

For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashwani Kumar Negi, Advocate.

For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar,

Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi

oChauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy

Advocates General.

________________C___________________________________________________________

Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral)

Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Junior

Coach (Football) in the office of District Youth Services & Sports

Officer, Kinnaur at Recong-peo, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved by

H order dated 19.12.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby he has been

transferred from afore station to the office of District Youth Services &

Sports Officer, Una, Himachal Pradesh, against vacant post.

2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been

highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Ashwani

Kumar Negi, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that since

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 07:13:15 :::CIS

##PAGE2##

2

petitioner has already completed normal tenure in hard/tribal area, he

ought to have been transferred to one of the stations of his choice.

3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed

to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call

for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by

Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Mr. Chauhan,

states that though petitioner has already completed normal tenure at

present place of posting, but sintce he belongs to District Kinnaur, he

cannot seek transfer to one of the stations of his choice after his

having completed three years, rather to have posting at one of the

stations of his choice, he is required to complete five years in tribal

area. He further states that otherwise also, transfer of the petitioner

has been effected on the basis of recommendation made by District

Youth Services & Sports, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo, Himachal Pradesh,

who himself stated that on account of winter season, sports activities

would be hampered in Kinnaur, as such, petitioner may be posted at

District Mandi.

4. Having taken note of fact that petitioner hails from

District Kinnaur, this Court is persuaded to agree with learned Deputy

Advocate General that petitioner, after his having completed three

years at tribal area, is not entitled to seek transfer to one of the

stations of his choice. Similarly, this Court, having carefully perused

::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2026 07:13:15 :::CIS

##PAGE3##

3

communication dated 04.09.2025 (Annexure P-1) placed on record by

the petitioner himself, states that petitioner has been transferred on

the basis of recommendation made by the District Youth Services &

Sports, Kinnaur at Reckong Peo, Himachal Pradesh, who having taken

note of upcoming winter season, requested the transfer of the

petitioner to Mandi so that services of the petitioner may be put to

best use.

5. Though for the reatsons stated hereinabove, this Court

sees no reason to interfere with the impugned transfer order, however,

having taken note of fact that petitioner is ready and willing to work at

Mandi, coupled with the fact that District Youth Services & Sports,

Kinnaur at Reckong Peo, Himachal Pradesh, had recommended his

transfer to Mandi, this Court, without going in the merits of the case,

deems it fit to dispose of the same reserving liberty to the petitioner to

file representation to the competent authority within two days for his

adjustment at Mandi or at one of the stations of his choice, as detailed

in the representation, which shall be decided by the competent

authority within ten days thereafter. Ordered accordingly. Needless to

say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant

order, shall afford an opportuni

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top