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

2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2456

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA


2026:HHC:17299


CWP No. 5091 of 2026


Balwant Singh … Petitioner

Versus

H.P.S.E.B.L. through its Under Secoretary and others … Respondents


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


Decided on: 15.05.2026


For the petitioner : Ms. Parul Negi, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate for respondent-Board.


(Ajay Mohan Goel)


Judge


May 15, 2026


(narender)

Petitioner Advocates:Amit Kumar Dhumal Richa Thakur Parul Negi ,Respondent Advocate: Rahul Thakur

##PAGE1##

2026:HHC:17299 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 5091 of 2026 Decided on: 15.05.2026

Balwant Singh … Petitioner

Versus H.P.S.E.B.L. through its Under Secoretary

and others … Respondents Coram

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

Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes _____________________________________________________

For the petitioner : Ms. Parul Negi, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Rahul Thakur, Advocate for respondent-Board.

Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for

quashing of transfer order dated 25.03.2026, in terms whereof, he has been transferred from Electrical Sub Division Bhaderwar under

iElectrical Division HPSEBL Sarkaghat, to Electrical Sub Division, HPSEBL, Keylong.

2. Today, when the case was taken up for consideration, learned Counsel for the respondents-Board has handed over an office order passed by the respondent-Authority dated 08.05.2026, in terms whereof, the representation of the petitioner, which was pending with the Authority for consideration to be transferred to

some other station, has been rejected.

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

::: Downloaded on - 18/05/2026 20:26:00 :::CIS

##PAGE2##

2

2026:HHC:17299

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that in terms of the impugned transfer order, the petitioner stands transferred to Keylong not because of any administrative exigency or public interest but as a result of a request generated by the private respondent in terms of Annexure P-2 appended with the writ

petition. t

4. Ms. Parul Negi, learned Counsel for the petitioner has taken the Court through the documents appended with the petition, including Annexure P-2 and submitted that the documents appended therewith demonstrate that the private respondent reques ted the Hon’ble Chief Minister to undertake certain transfers, which included the transfer of the petitioner from his present place of posting to Keylong or Shimla. As a result thereof, respondent- Board passed the impugned transfer order, transferring the petitioner from his present place of posting to Keylong. She submitted that above demonstrates that the impugned transfer order was not passed by the respondent-Board by applying its independent mind as to whether the petitioner deserved to be transferred from his present place of posting to Keylong or not but it simply obliged the private respondent by accepting his demand of

the transfer of the petitioner to a Tribal area.

5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent-

::: Downloaded on - 18/05/2026 20:26:00 :::CIS

##PAGE3##

3

2026:HHC:17299

Board submitted that the petitioner has already completed his normal tenure at the present place of posting and his transfer to Keylong was due to administrative exigency. He has also submitted that irrespective of the fact that as to what was the reason to initiate the transfer, fact of the matter is that the petitioner having completed his normal tenure tat the present place of posting, has no inherent right to continue to serve at the said station. He further submitted that the transfer has been effected by following the process, as is in vogue, by the respondent-Board and therefore, as

there is no merit in the present petition, the same be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the order passed by the Authority on

08.05.2026 as well as the documents appended with the petition.

7. The petitioner in terms of the impugned transfer order stands transferred from Electrical Sub Division Bhaderwar under Electrical Division HPSEBL Sarkaghat to Electrical Sub Division,

HPSEBL, Keylong.

8. Annexure P-2 demonstrates that the private respondent sought transfer of the petitioner from Bhaderwar to Keylong or

Shimla.

9. On a query put to learned Counsel for the respondent- Board, as to who is the private respondent, the Court was informed

::: Downloaded on - 18/05/2026 20:26:00 :::CIS

##PAGE4##

4

2026:H

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