IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8283 of 2025 Date of Decision:21.05.2025 _______________________________________________________ Deepak Kumar …….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. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Medical) in Government Girls High School Bijhari, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of impugned transfer order dated 15.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore school to Government High School, Rouri, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. 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 impugned transfer order is not sustainable in the eye of law as the same has been passed in violation of transfer 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 policy. He states that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, coupled with the fact that clubbing of previous stay in nearby vicinity has been held to be bad in law by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case titled Anurag Chadha vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, passed in CWP No. 8605 of 2023. Besides above, it also came to be submitted on behalf of the petitioner that on account of medical condition, petitioner cannot be posted at Government High School Rouri, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, which is at a distance of 150 Km from present place of posting. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Learned Additional Advocate General states that since petitioner has already completed more than two years seven months at present place of posting, issue of clubbing of previous posting may not be of much relevance. He states that as per averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, petitioner remained posted in and around present place of posting for more than nine years. If it is so, there is no scope of interference in the impugned transfer order. 3 4. Having taken note of the averments contained in the petition, this Court finds that petitioner is posted at present place of posting for more than two years seven months as such, this Court is not persuaded to agree with learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting. Moreover, this Court finds that petitioner remained posted in Hamirpur area for more than nine years and as such, no interference, if any, is called for in the impugned transfer order. However, having taken note of medical condition of the petitioner as well as his mother, which is apparent from the documents adduced on record, 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 his adjustment at a convenient station, which in turn, shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of 10 days sympathetically, taking note of transfer policy, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on medical grounds/adverse family circumstances. 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 appropriate order thereupon, Till the time representation, if any, filed by the petitioner within a period of one week, is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the 4 transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 21,2025 (shankar)