IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7601 of 2025 Date of Decision:08.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Jia Lal …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, proxy counsel vice Mr. Jagat Pal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who is working as Chowkidar, is aggrieved of order dated 30.04.2025 (Annexure P-1), issued under the signatures of Director (South) HPSFDCL, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, whereby he has been transferred from Chopal to Sawra, which is 80 Km from Chopal 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner, is that though petitioner is due to retire within a period of five months, but yet in violation of transfer policy, he has been transferred to far flung area. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. While putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, Ms. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate states that petitioner herein has not been transferred, rather he has been deployed at Sawra for execution of some special work. He states that though petitioner shall not be permanently deployed at Sawra, but on account of the fact that he is nearing retirement, he can make representation to the competent authority, which shall be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law. 4. Having taken note of the fact that petitioner has been not transferred, but he has been deployed at Sawra for rendering his services in liquor vend, coupled with the fact that petitioner is due to retire within a period of five months, 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 three days for adjustment/ cancellation of transfer order, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority 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 hearing to the petitioner and pass detailed speaking order thereupon, taking note of the fact that petitioner is due to retire within a period of five months. Till the time representation, if any, filed by the petitioner within a 3 period of three days, is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to attend duties at the station of deployment. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 08,2025 (shankar)