2025:HHC:8959 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.4901 of 2025 Date of Decision: 03.04.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Hardyal Singh ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Motta, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Lecturer (Political Science), at Government Senior Secondary School Loharghat, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-2), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having completed normal tenure of posting as well as adverse family circumstances. 2. It has been averred in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit that the petitioner herein has been working as Lecturer (Political Science) at present place of posting since 19.04.2021, meaning thereby, he has completed almost four years at present place of posting. Besides above, it has also been mentioned in the petition that petitioner’s mother is not in good health, as such, there is none to take care of her. 3. 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. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Deputy Advocate General, fairly states that representation (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 4. Since, petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that there is a provision in the Transfer Policy for consideration of request made by the petitioner on account of adverse family circumstances, 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 (Annexure P-2) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, besides affording 2 opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, shall also take note of provision contained in Transfer Policy and pass appropriate orders. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. April 03, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3