IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8385 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.05.2025 __________________________________________________________ Baldev Singh …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents __________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Gurdev Negi, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. __________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as JBT in Government Primary School, Gangtoli, Education Block Shillai, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of impugned transfer order dated 17.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Government Primary School, Sathor, Education Block Sataun, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, against vacancy, by clubbing his previous stay within radius of 20 kilometers in relaxation of sub-cadre reliever condition. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Gurdev Negi, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that impugned transfer 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- order has been passed in violation of the transfer policy, because petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting. Mr. Gurdev Negi, learned counsel representing the petitioner further states that clubbing of the previous stay, within the radius of 20 kilometers, is not permissible, while ascertaining the length of service of an employee at one station. He further states that petitioner has been transferred to a far-flung area, which is at a distance of 90 kilometers from the present place of posting. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar states that though petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but even otherwise, while ascertaining length of service of an employee at particular station, Government is well within its right to take note of service rendered by the petitioner in same vicinity, especially in same Education Block. He further states that petitioner has remained posted in the radius of 20 kilometers for more than 20 years and as such, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents while ordering his transfer. 4. For the reasons explained by learned Additional Advocate General, as taken note hereinabove, this Court sees no reason to interfere in the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld, -3- however, having taken note of adverse family circumstances of the petitioner, as came to be apprised to this Court during the proceedings of the case, 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 cancellation of his transfer order or adjustment at a convenient station, which in-turn shall be decided by the competent authority, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of ten days. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, authority concerned while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereupon taking note of transfer policy, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer on account of adverse family circumstances. Till the time, representation, if any, filed within one week, is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 21, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)