IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8308 of 2025 Decided on: 20th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joginder Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Kul Bhushan Khajuria, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Menka Raj Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. Rajat Choudhry, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhry, learned Assistant Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2 Petitioner’s grievance is to the office order dated 17.05.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereunder, he, a Junior Basic Teacher, has been transferred from GPS Ronhat, Education Block Shillai to GPS Gussan, Education Block Nohradhar, District Sirmour. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner though contends that the respondents have illegally transferred the 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 petitioner by clubbing his previous stays within a radius of 30 kilometers, but concedes that petitioner is about to complete three years at his present place of posting as well. The petitioner will complete three years at the present place on 06.09.2025. Learned counsel further contends that it is a single transfer and none else has been posted at petitioner’s place. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s present place of posting falls in the hard area in terms of the applicable transfer policy. That previously also, petitioner had rendered service in hard areas, i.e. GPS Bounch and GPS Koti Bounch. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case he is permitted to prefer a representation to the respondents/ competent authority for his adjustment at a place of his preference and thereafter the competent authority be directed to decide the same within a time bound schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 5. Having regard to the afore-submissions, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to file a representation to respondent No.2/competent authority, seeking adjustment at the place of his 3 preference, within a week from today. In case such a representation is received by respondent No.2/competent authority within the aforesaid period, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy within a period of ten days thereafter. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. Till such decision, operation of the impugned office order dated 17.05.2025 (Annexure P-2) shall remain stayed qua the petitioner, being a single transfer. It is made clear that in case no such representation is made within the aforesaid period, interim protection granted to the petitioner shall stand automatically vacated. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 20, 2025 Judge Mukesh