1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7522 of 2025 Date of decision: 02.09.2025 Raman Kumar. ...Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents. Coram: Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner : Mr. Narender Singh Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No.1 & 2-State. Mr. Munish Datwalia, Advocate, vice Mr. Kishore Pundir, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in the matter on 06.05.2025 noticing the gist of the case as under:- “Notice. Mr. P.K. Nadda, Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2. Notice be issued to respondent No.3, returnable on 29.05.2025, on steps being taken within one week. 2. Petitioner is a Trained Graduate Teacher serving at GSSS Marhana, District Bilaspur. Vide impugned office order dated 03.05.2025, he has been transferred to GHS Ghial U/C GSSS Namhol, District Bilaspur, vice respondent No.3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not completed his normal tenure of three years at the present place of posting, where he had joined on 08.09.2022. It is further submitted that the petitioner is suffering from 40% permanent disability and, due to this -2- disability, it would be difficult for him to join at the transferred station. 4. Considering the fact that the petitioner has not completed his normal tenure and is suffering from 40% permanent disability, and taking note of the statement of learned counsel that the impugned office order has not been implemented qua the petitioner and respondent No.3, the operation of the impugned office order dated 03.05.2025 shall remain stayed qua the petitioner and respondent No.3 till the next date of hearing. List on 29.05.2024. Appearing respondents to file reply within the aforesaid period.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined at the transferred station, therefore, present writ petition has been rendered infructuous. He further submits that in view of disability being suffered by the petitioner, he be permitted to represent to the respondents seeking his suitable adjustment in accordance with law. It is open for the employee/petitioner to represent to the employer seeking his adjustment. In case such representation is so made, the same shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a reasonable time. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua 2nd September, 2025 Judge (Pardeep)