IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7737 of 2025 Date of Decision:09.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Rajesh Kumar …….Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh … Respondent _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Naresh Kaul and Ms. Sheetal Kaul, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 01.05.2025 (Annexure P-3), whereby petitioner, who is working as Sub Divisional Ayush Medical Officer, Kheurik at Kaza District Lahaul Spiti, Himachal Pradesh has been transferred from aforesaid station to S.D.A.M.O Office, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set aside aforesaid order on the ground that after his having rendered three years services in hard area, he ought to have been transferred to one of the stations of his choice. It is averred in the petition that since July, 2022, petitioner has been working in hard area and as such, in terms of transfer policy, he ought to have been 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 transferred to one of the stations of his choice as was apprised to the Department vide representation dated 19.10.2024 (Annexure P-2). 2. While putting appearance on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General states that since respondents taking note of services rendered by the petitioner in hard area, posted him in soft area i.e. Sarkaghat, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while passing the impugned transfer order. 3. 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 taking note of services rendered by the petitioner in hard area, he has been transferred to soft area i.e. Sarkaghat, but since transfer policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer to one of the stations of his choice after his having served in hard area, coupled with the fact that petitioner herein filed representation dated 19.10.2024 giving therein details of five stations, there was no occasion, if any, for the respondents to post him at Sarkaghat, rather he should have been posted at one of the stations of his choice. 4. Since petitioner herein has been already posted in soft area i.e. S.D.A.M.O Office, Sarkaghat, this Court sees no reason to interfere in the impugned transfer order. However, having taken note of the fact that in terms of transfer policy, petitioner was required to be 3 given one station of his choice, especially when there is nothing on record to suggest that none of the stations indicated by the petitioner are vacant. In view of the above, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the fresh representation dated 5.5.2025(Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner, indicating therein stations, which are vacant and where petitioner can be posted expeditiously, preferably within a period of 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 detailed speaking order thereafter, taking note of observations as well as directions contained in the instant order. Till the time representation filed by the petitioner is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 09,2025 (shankar)