IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6159 of 2025 Date of Decision:11.04.2025 _______________________________________________________ Kamal Dev …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinay Mehta, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT(Arts) is aggrieved of order dated 07.04.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby he has been transferred from Government Senior Secondary School Sarora, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh to Government Senior Secondary School Poolan, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Vinay Mehta, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that though petitioner has already served in hard area during his service career i.e. Bali Chowki, District Mandi, 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Himachal Pradesh, but yet again he has been transferred to tribal area i.e. Poolan, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh. 3. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Anup Rattan, learned Advocate General, states that impugned transfer odder, if perused, clearly reveals that same has been passed under rationalization policy. He states that there are number of schools where adequate staff is not deployed and there are other schools where strength of students is very low, but yet there is over staffing. He states that bare perusal of transfer policy nowhere suggests that an employee, who has already served in hard area, cannot be again deployed in hard area, rather in administrative exigency or in public interest, he/she can be again transferred to hard area. 4. Though, careful perusal of averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, reveals that prior to petitioner’s posting at Government Senior Secondary School, Sarora, he remained posted at Bali Chowki, District Mandi, HP, but this Court cannot lose sight of the fact that petitioner belonged to that area only and it can be well presumed that he had been working in that area as per his convenience. 5. Though, having taken note of fact that impugned transfer order has been passed under rationalization policy and petitioner being surplus at Government Senior Secondary School, Sarora, has been ordered to be transferred to Government Senior Secondary School, Poolan, District 3 Chamba, Himachal Pradesh, this Court sees no reason to interfere in the impugned transfer order, but having taken note of adverse family circumstances, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within a period of one week for cancellation or adjustment at nearby station on the ground of adverse family circumstances, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of one week. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon, taking note of the transfer policy, which admittedly provides for adjustment of an employee on account of adverse family circumstances as well as on medical grounds. Till the disposal of the representation filed by the petitioner, he shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge April 11, 2025 (shankar)