IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.7976 of 2025 Decided on: 15th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sudhir Kumar …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Devender K. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. L.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 to 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Considering the nature of order being passed hereinafter, reply to the petition is not required to be called for from respondents No.1 to 3. Notice is also not required to be issued to respondent No.4. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 3. Petitioner is a Trained Graduate Teacher (Arts). He was posted at GSSS Salaon, District Bilaspur in August, 2022. His grievance is to the office order dated 01.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereunder, he was transferred to GMS Selli, under complex GSSS Bani Materni, District Solan vice respondent No.4, who has been brought in petitioner’s place. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has completed 02 years and 09 months at his present place of posting. He further submits that the petitioner though now stands relieved from his present place of posting, but he has not yet joined at the transferred station. It was also submitted that the petitioner is due to retire on 31.03.2027. In view of Clause 5.5 of the applicable transfer policy, the respondents are required to make possible efforts for adjusting the petitioner at a place of his choice considering his impending retirement. That the petitioner has already preferred a representation on 06.05.2025 (Annexure P-3), through proper channel, to the Director of Education/competent authority. The same, however, has not been decided till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case the competent authority is directed to decide his aforesaid representation in accordance with law keeping in 3 view the aforesaid submissions, within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and without interfering with the transfer of respondent No.4 under the impugned office order to the place of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the Director of Education, Himachal Pradesh/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 06.05.2025 (Annexure P-3) in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy within a period of one week from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Till such time, the petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station and shall be at liberty to avail leave of the kind due. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 15, 2025 Judge Mukesh