2025:HHC:12798 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7517 of 2025 Date of Decision: 06.05.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Manjeet Singh Chandel ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Amit Kumar Dhumal, Advocate. 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, for respondents-State. Mr. Ashwani Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 5. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Non- Medical) at Government Middle School Lalyar, under complex Government Senior Secondary School Samirpur, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of impugned transfer order dated 02.05.2025 issued by the Director, School Education, Himachal Pradesh, whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Government Senior Secondary School Darlaghat, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel representing the petitioner is that since petitioner is set to retire within a period of less than two years, he could not be transferred to far flung area in terms of transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which otherwise enables an employee nearing retirement to seek transfer to one of the stations of his choice. 3. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while putting in appearance on behalf of respondent-State, states that since petitioner has already worked for more than two and a half year at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that he remained posted in District Hamirpur for quite long, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while passing impugned transfer order. 4. Mr. Ashwani Sharma, learned counsel for respondent No. 5, also made submission as has been made by learned Additional Advocate General. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, though this Court finds that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but since he remained posted in District Hamirpur for more than one decade, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while passing impugned transfer order. However 2 having taken note of the fact that petitioner is due to retire within a period of less than two years and there is specific provision contained in the transfer policy that an employee having less than two years to retire shall be posted to one of the stations of his choice, 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, praying therein for cancellation of transfer or adjustment at one of the stations of his choice, which in turn shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of two weeks. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, besides affording opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, shall also take note of provision contained in Transfer Policy and pass appropriate orders. Till the time, representation, as detailed herein above, is not decided in terms of instant order, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at transferred station in terms of impugned transfer order. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. May 06, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3