1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP NO. 1556 of 2008 Date of decision: 4.9.2008 Suresh Kumar …Petitioner Vs State of HP and others ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Hemant Vaid, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General. R.B. Misra, J. (Oral) CMP No. 2259 /2008 Allowed. The application stands disposed of. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.7.2008 (Annexure P-4), whereby petitioner’s representation in compliance to the order dated 22nd May, 2008 ( Annexure P-2 ) of H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (in short called “ Tribunal”), has been dismissed. 2. With the consent of the parties, the present writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 3. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as JBT on 1st August, 1998 in Government Primary School, Ullansa, Education Block, Garola, Tehsil Bharmour, District Chamba, HP where he worked about 10 years. The place where the petitioner was employed is a tribal are, but after 10 years without any rhyme and reason, the petitioner has been transferred as JBT teacher to Government Primary School, Dadriara Education Block, Sihunta, -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ?. 2 Tehsil Bharmour, District Chamba, HP vide order dated 11.4.2008 (Annexure P-1). According to the petitioner, he wants to serve in the tribal area, but vide impugned transfer order, his family would be unsettled. Since the petitioner was earlier deployed in the tribal area which happens to be his native place. According to the petitioner while transferring an employee from tribal area three options have to be given to him whereas, he has not been given any option or choice. 4. It is well settled that transfer is an exigency of service and transfer of the employee may be made for betterment of service, administration and in public interest. The judicial review could be made by the court in transfer matters only if the transfer has not been made in public interest or has been made by way of political vendetta or colourable exercise of power or by way of malafide or by way of punishment. 5. We have carefully gone through he contents of the order dated 11th April, 2008. The said order has been made in the interest of service of the petitioner and no any ground has been shown where this court may exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India. We are not inclined to interfere in the impugned transfer, therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, CMP No. 2258/2008 is also dismissed. ( R.B. Misra ), J. ( Surjit Singh ), J. 4th September, 2008 (sl) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10