VISHAL(Not Applicable) vs THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable) — CWP/5093/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HPHC010148212026

Filing Number

CWP/12770/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

CWP/5093/2026

Registration Date

09-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

Bench Type

Single

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 14-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VISHAL(Not Applicable)

    Adv. Daleep Singh Kaith

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS(Not Applicable)

    Adv. AG 1123

  2. 2.Engineer-in-Chief HPPWD Nirman(Not Applicable)

  3. 3.The Superintending Engineer(Not Applicable)

  4. 4.The Executive Engineer HPPWD(Not Applicable)

  5. 5.Sh. Vishal Kong S/o Lt. Jia Lal(Not Applicable)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan GoelView PDF

    The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition challenging a Junior Engineer's transfer from Rampur to Nankhari, holding that after serving nearly five years at the current posting, the petitioner cannot challenge the transfer order's legality. The court disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner liberty to approach authorities for alternative station adjustment within one week, with a decision to be made within three weeks, and directing that he not be forced to join the new station pending this representation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Office Objection

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/5093/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed the petition challenging a Junior Engineer's transfer from Rampur to Nankhari, holding that after serving nearly five years at the current posting, the petitioner cannot challenge the transfer order's legality. The court disposed of the petition while granting the petitioner liberty to approach authorities for alternative station adjustment within one week, with a decision to be made within three weeks, and directing that he not be forced to join the new station pending this representation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case