IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.8261 of 2025 Decided on: 19th May, 2025 _________________________________________________________________ Rup Lal ....Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua 1 Whether approved for reporting? _________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner: Mr. S.K. Banyal, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate General. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts service of notice on behalf of the respondents. With consent of learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is serving as Lecturer (SN) (History) at GSSS Tanehar, District Mandi. His grievance is to the office order dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) whereunder, he has been transferred to GSSS Dainkwan, District Kangra, H.P. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? yes - 2 - 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had joined his present place of posting only on 01.09.2024. He has been transferred under the impugned transfer order without letting him complete his normal tenure. It has also been submitted that petitioner has not been held entitled to TTA/JT under the impugned transfer order, despite the fact that petitioner has not made any request for his transfer. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case he is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.2/Competent Authority, against the office order dated 16.05.2025, whereafter, respondent No.2/Competent Authority be directed to consider his representation within a time bound schedule. Learned Additional Advocate General has no objection for the same. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to prefer a representation to respondent No.2/Competent Authority against the impugned order. In case such a representation is made within three days, the same shall be considered and decided by the Competent Authority, in - 3 - accordance with law and as per applicable transfer policy, within a week thereafter. Copy of decision so taken, be communicated to the petitioner. In view of the contentions urged by learned counsel for the petitioner, till the decision of the representation, operation of office order dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) shall remain stayed. It is made clear that in case petitioner does not represent within the aforesaid period, the protection granted to him under this order shall automatically stand vacated. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge May 19, 2025 R.Atal