IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4717 of 2025 Date of Decision: 1.4.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Meena Kumari .…...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and ors. .....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinay Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Ravinder Singh, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Through instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of directions to the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation dated 25.11.2024, Annexure P-2, whereby she has prayed for her transfer from present place of posting, i.e, Ayurvedic Health Centre Majhangan District Mandi, H.P to Ayurvedic Health Centre, Majhwar District Mandi, where the post of Ayurvedic Pharmacist is going to fall vacant in the month of June, 2025. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. While - 2 - accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that representation (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. Having perused averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported with an affidavit, this Court finds that the petitioner herein was promoted to the post of Ayurvedic Pharmacist in the month of March, 2020 and since then, she has been working at present place of posting. As the petitioner has already completed her normal tenure of posting at the present place of posting coupled with the fact that the present place of posting falls under hard area, she at the first instance approached the competent authority by filing representation seeking her transfer/adjustment at nearby station. Since the respondents have failed to decide such representation made by the petitioner, she is compelled to approach this Court by way of instant proceedings. Since the transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh specifically provides for transfer/adjustment from hard area to soft area after completion of normal tenure of posting, therefore, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the innocuous prayer made by the petitioner for consideration of her representation (Annexure P-2) by the competent authority in a time bound manner. - 3 - 4. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, this Court without going into the merits of the case deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass speaking order. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. April 1, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma) mamta Judge