IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7248 of 2010 Date of decision: 07.01.2011 Ashok Kumar Gupta … 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. Vishal Panwar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): The petitioner was earlier posted as Drawing Teacher and he remained posted within District Bilaspur from 1974 to 1976 and then at various places in Shimla right from 1976 to 1999. Again he was posted within District Solan and was there for less then one year from 16.10.1999 to 4.5.2000. Thereafter, he has served around Shimla right from 2000 to 2009. He was posted at Mamligh in Solan and remained there for 1½ years and again he was transferred to Rajhana in Shimla till date. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the Director Higher Education has considered the stay of the petitioner in and around Shimla, which was found to be more as compared to the other similarly placed persons. 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2. A perusal of the reply filed by the respondents clearly shows that the petitioner had been posted in and around Solan and most of the time he had spent near Shimla at various places. Therefore, the impugned order is not alleged to be malafide and cannot be termed as malafide or not in the public interest calling for an interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The impugned order is not liable to be quashed and hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed, so also the pending application(s), if any. ( V.K. Ahuja ), January 07, 2011 Judge (BSS)