IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7233 of 2025 Date of Decision: 05.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Shalini Sharma …….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. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who is working as JBT at Government Primary School, Pirsaluhi, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of impugned transfer order dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P- 1), whereby she has been ordered to be transferred from afore station to Government Primary School, Tarmehar, Tehsil Baijnath, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, which is stated to be at a distance of 150 kilometers from her native village. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that impugned transfer order has been issued during ban on transfers, that too, 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 without approval of the competent authority. Mr. Kaundal states that in the event of implementation of impugned transfer order, great prejudice shall be caused to the petitioner, who has two minor daughters to look after at her native place, which is very far from the transferred station. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and 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. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General states that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that she has been transferred within Kangra District, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents while ordering transfer of the petitioner from present place of posting to Government Primary School, Tarmehar, Tehsil Baijnath, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. 4. Since it is quite apparent from the pleadings adduced on record, which are duly supported by way of affidavit, that petitioner is working at present place of posting for more than 15 years, there appears to be no justification for this Court to interfere with the impugned transfer order, as such, same is upheld. However, having taken note of the fact that petitioner is having two minors daughters 3 and there is none to take care of them, this Court without going into the merits of the case, 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, praying therein for cancellation of transfer order or adjustment at a nearby station, which in-turn shall be decided by the afore authority, expeditiously, preferably, 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 being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereafter, taking note of transfer policy formulated by State of Himachal Pradesh, wherein an employee can seek transfer/cancellation on the ground of adverse family circumstances. Till the time, representation, as detailed hereinabove, is not decided by the competent authority in terms of the instant order, she shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 05, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)