IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.6885 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.04.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Smt. Sangita Supehia ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Rathore and Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Advocates. 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. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who is TGT (Medical), has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation dated 10.4.2025 (Annexure P-3), whereby she has prayed for transfer from her present place of posting i.e. GSSS Saloh, Tehsil and District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, to one of the stations as detailed in the representation. 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 notices on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Panwar, states that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting and station, where she has been transferred, is not far from the present place of posting, present petition deserves outright dismissal. 3. True, it is that perusal of order dated 5.4.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby petitioner has been ordered to be transferred, reveals that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting coupled with the fact that it is sole prerogative of employer to post/transfer an employee to a particular station, there appears to be no justification to interfere with the impugned transfer order, however having taken note of the documents with regard to treatment of the petitioner placed on record, this court sees no impediment in accepting prayer made by the petitioner in issuing direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation in a time bound manner. 4. Consequently, in view of the above, 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 pending representation (Annexure P-3) expeditiously, preferably within ten days. 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 a speaking order 3 taking note of the transfer policy, which enables the employer to consider prayer made by an employee for transfer on medical grounds. Till the time, representation is decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. April 28, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), Manjit Judge