IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7203 of 2010 Date of decision: 06.01.2011 Karan Singh … Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate. Petitioner is also present. For the respondents: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No 1 & 2. Mr. S.C. Awasthi, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3 is also present. V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): Petitioner was transferred from Lambloo to Mandhol. He filed a representation and as per the interim order passed on 19.10.2010 in CWP No. 6519 of 2010, he was posted at Balakrupi in place of respondent No. 3. In pursuance of that order, he joined at Balakrupi and respondent No. 3 got his transfer order cancelled vide Annexure P-5. The petitioner has again filed this writ petition. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. Respondent No. 3 is at Balakrupi since 1998 and, therefore, he is not entitled to claim that he should be adjusted at Balakrupi. Since the petitioner joined at Balakrupi only on 20.10.2010 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 and his subsequent transfer cannot be said to be in public interest, hence order of transfer is quashed. The petition is disposed of to the extent that the petitioner shall be allowed to continue work at Balakrupi and respondent No. 3 may join at Droh in District Kangra. However, respondent No. 3 is at liberty to make a representation to the Director of Higher Education putting up his grievance, if any, in regard to the illness of his mother and his own illness, who will consider the case of respondent No. 3 in accordance with law and justice. 4. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti. ( V.K. Ahuja ), January 06, 2011 Judge (BSS)