Today, the Supreme Court set aside the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s interim stay and allowed the State government to continue with its decision to shift the H.P. State Commission for Backward Classes from Shimla to Dharamshala in Kangra district.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant , Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N.V. Anjaria was hearing the State government’s appeal against the High Court order that had stayed the relocation of the Commission while hearing a public interest litigation.

The High Court, led by Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, had observed that the decision required closer scrutiny in view of its administrative and financial implications.

Appearing for the State, senior advocate Madhavi Divan submitted that the decision to shift the Commission was based on logistical considerations, noting that Dharamshala offers a larger administrative complex and already houses several key commissions. She further pointed out that a significant population of backward class communities resides in Kangra district. It was also clarified that the Shimla office would continue to function as a camp office for conducting some hearings, and therefore a blanket stay was unwarranted.

The respondents’ counsel informed the Supreme Court that the PIL before the High Court had been filed by a former member of the Commission.

Objecting to judicial interference in a policy decision, the CJI remarked that the location of a government office falls within the prerogative of an elected government. “Who are you to dictate to an elected government where its office should be? If you have a problem, oppose them in the next election. How does this issue become justiciable?” the CJI observed.

The respondents argued that the relocation was being done merely for the convenience of the newly appointed Chairperson, pointing out that the Commission had been functioning in Shimla since 1996. However, the CJI noted that shifting the Commission closer to a region with a higher concentration of backward class communities would further the cause of effective justice delivery.

Allowing the appeal, the Bench held that, prima facie, shifting the headquarters of an institution is a policy matter with minimal scope for judicial review, unless it directly affects constitutional or civil rights of the public at large.

The Court set aside the High Court’s interim order and permitted the State government to proceed with shifting the Commission to Dharamshala or any other suitable location, subject to the final outcome of the pending proceedings before the High Court.

The case arises out of State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ram Lal Sharma [SLP (C) No. 5202 of 2026].