IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9074 of 2025 Decided on: 30th May, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tanzin Samphel …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Aman Thakur, Advocate vice Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Sikander Bhushan, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Sikander Bhushan, learned Deputy Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. Petitioner is serving as Peon in the office of Deputy Commissioner, Lahaul & Spiti at Keylong. His case is that he is serving in the aforesaid office since 2017. He belongs to Spiti/Kaza region. His family members are suffering from serious ailments, requiring constant care and attention. His wife is single handedly discharging all household responsibilities at Spiti/Kaza and is 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 overburdened. There is none else in the family to look after the household affairs. Due to his posting at Keylong, the petitioner is not in a position to provide any meaningful assistance to his family at Spiti/Kaza. That the petitioner has also completed his normal tenure of posting at Keylong and therefore, is eligible to be considered for transfer to his home region. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had preferred a representation to respondent No.2 on 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), seeking his transfer on the aforesaid grounds from Keylong to Spiti/ Kaza. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid representation within a fixed time schedule. Learned Deputy Advocate General is not averse to this prayer. 4. Looking to the limited grievance of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2/competent authority to consider and decide the aforesaid representation of the petitioner dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) in accordance with law and applicable transfer policy within a period of three weeks from today. The decision so arrived at shall also be communicated to the petitioner. 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua May 30, 2025 Judge Mukesh