Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Promila Devi vs State Of H.P. & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 971 HP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 971 HP
Judgement Date : 4 February, 2021

Himachal Pradesh High Court
Promila Devi vs State Of H.P. & Others on 4 February, 2021
Bench: Anoop Chitkara

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 6039 of 2020.

.

Reserved on : 22 nd January, 2021.

Date of Decision : 4 th February, 2021.

    Promila Devi                                                        ...Petitioner





                                      Versus
    State of H.P. & Others                                            ...Respondents
    Coram:

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Vacation Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Avinash Jaryal, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Mr. Narinder Guleria, rAddl. AGs. With Mr. Bhupender Thakur, Mr. Gaurav Sharma & Ms. Divya Sood, Dy.

A.Gs. and Mr. Rajat Chauhan, Law Officer, for respondents No.1 to 3.

COURT PROCEEDINGS CONVENED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

Anoop Chitkara, Vacation Judge.

The petitioner, who is working as Language Teacher,

at Government Senior Secondary School, Recong Peo, District

Kinnaur, H.P. and is under transfer to Government Senior

Secondary School, Shong, District Kinnaur, H.P., has come up

before this Court seeking quashing of impugned order of transfer

dated 16.12.2020, Annexure P-1, on the grounds that she has

been transferred on the basis of D.O. Note.

2. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on

record the written instructions, in which the stand of the

respondent-State is that the transfer order dated 16.12.2020,

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Annexure P-1 is just and proper because it was issued by the

competent authority.

.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. It remains undisputed that the petitioner is posted in

the present place of posting from the very beginning. Her total

stay has exceeded 13 years. Thus she has not legal right to

oppose her transfer. Thus, the transfer order is not in violation of

the transfer policy. As such, there is no merit in this petition.

However, clause 16.1 of the transfer Policy provides that a

person belonging to Tribal area is also entitled to posting in the

place of choice outside the Tribal area after completion of the

terms.

5. Consequently, this petition is disposed of with liberty

to the petitioner to make representation to the respondent/

authorities concerned giving five stations of her choice, within

two weeks from today, in the light of the transfer policy. On

receipt of such representation, the respondent/authorities shall

decide the same, in the light of the transfer policy occupying the

field, within two weeks. Pending application(s), if any, are

closed.

(Anoop Chitkara), Vacation Judge.

February 04, 2020 (ps)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter