IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 1310 of 2011. Reserved on: 9.5.2011 Date of decision: 3.6.2011 Hind Rustam …. Petitioner Versus HPSEB Ltd. & ors. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting ? No For the petitioner: Ms.Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Trilok Jamwal, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.3.2011 whereby he has been transferred from Electrical Division, Solan to Shimla. The main ground raised by the petitioner is that he on promotion to the post of Superintendent Grade-II was transferred from Transmission Division, Nalagarh, District Solan to Audit Party, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur. However, on his request, he was posted at 2 Electrical Division, Solan since the petitioner was to superannuate within three years. The petitioner thereafter joined at Solan Division on 15.7.2010 but within eight months, he was again transferred to Shimla vide impugned order dated 14.3.2011. Hence the present petition. The stand of the respondent-Board is that the petitioner has served during his entire career in his home District, i.e., Solan and remained posted in and around Solan itself. The record produced before this Court shows that the petitioner remained at Solan from the time of his initial appointment on 1.4.1978 to 7.7.1982. Thereafter, he was transferred to Arki where he remained barely for two months and then he was posted at Nalagarh where he remained for 13 years. The petitioner was then transferred to Parwanoo in the year 1995 and worked there till 1999. Thereafter, he spent about one and a half year in Nalagarh and then the petitioner was transferred back to Parwanoo and remained there from 2000 to 2006. He was again transferred to Nalagarh 3 and remained there till 2010 and as mentioned hereinabove joined at Solan on 15.7.2010. It is thus obvious that the petitioner has managed to stay in and around Solan for his entire service career. The transfer policy is a guiding policy and no employee has a vested right to claim that he should remain posted at one station throughout his career. Since the petitioner has managed to stay in Solan District throughout his career, his transfer from Solan to Shimla which is less than 45 kms. cannot be said to be such a transfer as to call for interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in the petition which is accordingly rejected. No order as to costs. June 3, 2011 (Deepak Gupta) (m) Judge