IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.3479 of 2023 Date of Decision: 24.03.2025 _______________________________________________________ Sunil Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh … Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Parkash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Since, it is apparent from the pleadings adduced on record by the respective parties that the petitioner has already completed his normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, there appears to be no justification to interfere in the impugned transfer order. However, vide order dated 06.06.2023, this Court having taken note of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner that transfer of the petitioner has been effected on the basis of D. O. Note, stayed the impugned transfer order dated 03.06.2023 (Annexure P-1), but careful perusal of the reply filed by the respondents clearly reveals that approved UO note was received from the Office of Hon’ble Chief Minister regarding transfer of the petitioner, who is working as Driver in HRTC Unit Nahan, but impugned transfer order was not effected upon pursuant to aforesaid D.O. Note. It is quite apparent from the reply filed by the respondents that petitioner has been working in HRTC 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Unit Nahan for the last six years prior to issuance of transfer order. Since it is not in dispute that petitioner has already completed his normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, this Court otherwise is not required to take note of the D.O. Note, if any, issued by a political person for transfer of the petitioner. 2. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and accordingly, same is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file appropriate representation to the competent authority for his adjustment at present place of posting or at nearby station on account of adverse family circumstances within a period of one week, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of ten days in terms of transfer policy, which specifically provides for transfer/adjustment of an employee on medical grounds/adverse family circumstances. Till the time, representation, if any, filed within a period of one week in terms of aforesaid order, is decided by the competent authority, order dated 6.6.2023 shall remain in force. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge March 24, 2025 (shankar)