IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4865 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.04.2025 _________________________________________________________ Rakesh Navharsh Singh ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Another …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C Verma & Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. _________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Arts) at GMS Jangla u/c of GSSS Parchhore, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P-4), whereby he has sought transfer from aforesaid station to the station, as detailed in Para (i) of the relief clause, on account of his having completed normal tenure of posting at the present place of posting. 2. It is averred in the petition, which is duly supported by way of an affidavit, that petitioner herein was appointed as TGT (Arts) in December 2021 and since then, he has been working as such in the 2 same school. Though, services of the petitioner were regularized in the month of July 2024, but yet he was not transferred. Since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at the present place of posting, coupled with the fact that he has adverse family circumstances, he has filed representation to the competent authority seeking therein his transfer to one of the station, as detailed in the representation, but since no heed was ever paid to the same, he is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 3. Having regard to the nature of order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, who while accepting notice on behalf of the respondents, fairly states that pending representation, if any, filed by the petitioner shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. During proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the petitioner also apprised this Court that one post of TGT (Arts) is lying vacant at Government High School, Bhadiara, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 4. Though, it is the sole prerogative of an employer to transfer an employee, but having taken note of adverse family circumstances of the petitioner, as detailed in the representation of the petitioner, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of 3 the present petition with the direction to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P-4), 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 thereafter taking note of transfer policy, which admittedly provides for transfer of an employee on account of adverse family circumstances. This Court hopes and trusts and respondents shall also take note of vacancy, which is stated to have been lying vacant while considering the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings in the appropriate Court of law, if he still remains aggrieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. April 03, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (Rajeev Raturi) Judge