IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 8506/2025 Decided on: 22.05.2025 Pooja …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Ors. .…Respondents. ………………………………………………………………………………. Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Ms. Kiran Dhiman, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General, for respondents No. 1, 2 and 4. Mr. Rajesh Parkash, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Jyotsna Rewal Dua , J Notice. Mr. Rajat Choudhary, learned Assistant Advocate General and Mr. Rajesh Parkash, learned counsel, accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1, 2 & 4 and 3, respectively. With the consent of learned counsel of the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 2. Petitioner is serving as Panchayat Secretary at Gram Panchayat Keylong. Her grievance is to the office order dated 23.04.2025 (Annexure P-1), which transfers her to Gram Panchayat 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Triloknath, District Lahaul and Spiti. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has completed her normal tenure at the aforesaid hard/tribal area, where she was posted in the year 2008. That in accordance with applicable Transfer Policy, petitioner was required to be posted at a station of her choice after inviting options from her. That the respondents in contravention to the Policy, transferred the petitioner under the impugned office order. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that incumbent at Serial No.13 in the impugned office order has since joined at the place of petitioner, therefore, the petitioner would be satisfied, in case, she is permitted to make a representation to the respondents/competent authority, seeking her suitable adjustment on completion of more than requisite tenure at the aforesaid hard/tribal area, whereafter, the respondents/competent authority be directed to consider and decide the representation, in accordance with applicable Transfer Policy, within time bound schedule. Learned Assistant Advocate General has no objection to this prayer. 3. In view of above submissions and without interfering with the transfer of incumbent at Serial No.13 in the impugned office order, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to prefer a representation to the respondents/competent authority within two days, seeking her suitable transfer/adjustment, who shall in turn, consider and decide the same, in accordance with law and in terms of 3 applicable Transfer Policy, within a further period of one week. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Till such time, the petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station and she may avail the leave of kind due. In case the representation is not preferred by the petitioner within the indicated time-line, the protection made available to her under this order shall stand vacated. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 22nd May, 2025(rohit)