IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.8973 of 2025 Date of Decision: 29.05.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Vinod Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Arush Matlotia, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents-State. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Lab Attendant at Government Senior Secondary School Charri, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-4), whereby he has prayed for cancellation of his transfer on medical grounds. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Arush Matlotia, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that though petitioner has not completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but yet he has been transferred in violation of transfer Policy, which otherwise provides for a minimum tenure of three years at one station. 3. Though before filing the petition at hand, petitioner has approached respondents by way of representation, but since nothing was done, he is compelled to approach this Court in the instant proceedings. 4. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly states that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting. He states that petitioner is working at Government Senior Secondary School Charri, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh for the last two years and seven months and before that he is posted at Shahpur, which is at a distance of 10 Kms from the present place of posting. 5. Having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, there appears to be no justification to interfere in the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld. However, having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already approached respondents by way of 2 representation, praying therein for cancellation of his transfer on medical grounds, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from today. 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 taking note of observations made hereinabove as well as Transfer Policy, which enables an employee to seek cancellation of transfer or adjustment at a convenient station on medical grounds. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. May 29, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3