IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8397 of 2025 Date of Decision: 21.05.2025 __________________________________________________________ Nand Lal …….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: Ms. Lalita Verma, 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, Gahar, Education Block Nihri, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of impugned transfer order dated 08.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Government Primary School, Rullang, Education Block Drang- I, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. 2. 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. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. B.C. Verma states that since petitioner has already completed 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? -2- normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, no interference in the impugned transfer order is called for. 3. Since careful perusal of pleadings adduced on record by petitioner clearly reveals that petitioner has remained posted in Education Block Nihri for more than 20 years, there appears to be no justification for this Court to interfere in the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld, however, having taken note of adverse family circumstances of the petitioner, as detailed in the petition and made aware to this Court during proceeding of the case, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition with the direction to respondents to consider and decide his pending representation dated 19.05.2025 (Annexure P-3), 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 to a convenient station, on the ground of adverse family circumstance. Till the time, representation, as detailed hereinabove, 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)