IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8857 of 2025 Date of Decision: 28.05.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Mohan Lal …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Another ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: M/s Vikrant Thakur and Shivani Priya, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. B.C. Verma and Mr. Vishal Panwar, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who is Central Head Teacher at GCPS Saribasa, Education Block Ransar, District Shimla, is aggrieved of office order dated 06.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to GCPS, Chingchwadi, Education Block Chhohara, District Shimla. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Vikrant Thakur, learned counsel representing the petitioner is that though petitioner has completed normal tenure of posting at present station, but on account of the fact that petitioner has already served in hard area twice, there was no occasion, if any, for respondents to again transfer him to difficult area. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 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. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Verma states that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present station, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents, while passing impugned transfer order. Mr. Verma further states that mere fact that petitioner remained posted in hard/tribal area in past, cannot be a ground for setting aside the transfer order, rather, being a Government employee, petitioner can be sent anywhere in the State of Himachal Pradesh. 4. Having perused averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by way of an affidavit, this Court finds that petitioner has completed normal tenure of posting at present station and petitioner has also remained posted in hard area twice in his service career, if it is so, there appears to be merit in the contention of Mr. Vikrant Thakur, learned counsel representing the petitioner that petitioner herein cannot be again transferred to GCPS, Chingchwadi, Education Block Chhohra, which is again difficult area, rather, on account of the fact that petitioner has completed normal tenure of posting at present station, he ought to have been transferred to some other station. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the competent 3 authority, praying therein for cancellation of his transfer order or adjustment at a convenient station, within a period of one week, which in-turn shall be decided by the afore 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, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at a convenient station, after his/her having served in hard/tribal area. Till the time, representation, if filed within one week, is not decided in terms of instant order, petitioner shall not be relieved, if not already relieved. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 28, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)