IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 7882/2025 Decided on: 16.05.2025 Suresh Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Vikas Rajput, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Following order was passed in this matter on 14.05.2025:- “Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner is a Forest Guard, presently serving at Wildlife Range Uhl at Bir Wildlife Division Hamirpur. His case is that his present place of posting is a hard area. He has already put in 01 year and 09 months of service at the aforesaid station. Petitioner’s 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes 2 grievance is to the office order dated 08.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) that transfers him to Wildlife Range Dhameta under Wildlife Division Hamirpur. Petitioner’s case is that the impugned office order is contrary to the transfer policy. He has not been allowed to complete his normal tenure at the present place of posting. That on completion of normal tenure at the present station, petitioner would be entitled to seek a posting of his choice. 3. There is substance in the contentions of the petitioner. Hence, the impugned office order dated 08.05.2025 (Annexure P- 1) shall remain stayed. 4. Learned Additional Advocate General to have instructions from the respondents for letting the petitioner to complete his normal tenure at the present place of posting, stated to be a hard area. List on 16.05.2025.” 2. Pursuant thereto, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 14.05.2025 from the Conservator of Forests Wildlife Circle (North), Dharmshala. The said instructions admit the factual assertions of the petitioner that he has completed about one year and nine months at his present place of posting and do not dispute that the petitioner’s present place of posting falls under hard area as per applicable Transfer Policy. As per office instructions, the respondents have no objections, in case, the petitioner is allowed to complete his normal tenure at the present place of posting. 3. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to complete his 3 normal tenure at the present place of posting. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge May 16, 2025(rohit)