2025:HHC:8014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4517 of 2025 Date of Decision: 27.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Sujan Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein who is working as TGT Non-Medical at GSSS, Kanol, District Kangra, H.P. which is a rural area, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation for transfer from aforesaid station to some other station on account of adverse family circumstances and medical grounds. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:8014 otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. 3. Careful perusal of pleadings adduced on record by the petitioner reveals that petitioner has completed normal tenure at present place of posting and at present, he is suffering from 30% locomotive disability, as a result, thereof he needs surgical intervention. Since petitioner has already filed representation for his transfer in terms of the transfer policy, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the petition. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation 24.03.2025 (Annexure P-4) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks. 5. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a speaking order thereupon, taking note of the transfer policy wherein a provision has been made to transfer an employee on the medical grounds. Liberty is also reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in appropriate court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. 3 2025:HHC:8014 Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 27, 2025 (Rupsi)