2025:HHC:17894 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9393 of 2025 Date of Decision: 5.6.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Krishan Kumar .…...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and ors. .....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. Nemo for respondent No.3. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Through instant petition, the petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Non-Medical) at GMS, Balghar, under Complex GSSS Dadasiba, District Kangra, H.P has approached this Court against the impugned transfer order, Annexure P-1, whereby he has been transferred to GMS, Lakhoti, under complex GSSS Dubloo, District Shimla vice respondent No.3. 2. Though the petitioner has completed his normal tenure at present place of posting, but prayer has been made to set aside the impugned transfer order qua the petitioner on the ground that the sister of the petitioner aged 29 years, is suffering from serious 2025:HHC:17894 - 2 - psychological problem. Besides this, petitioner states that there is none to take care of his ailing father. Petitioner submits that he was transferred to the present place of posting on his request, keeping in view his adverse family circumstances but now he has again been transferred to a distant place. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to issue notice to respondent No.3 or call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, as such, same is dispensed with. Mr. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General, fairly admits that the petitioner was posted at present place, on his own request, in view of compelling family circumstances but since, now he has completed normal tenure at the present station, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the State, while issuing the impugned transfer order, qua the petitioner. 4. Though having taken note of the fact that though the petitioner was posted at present place on his own request, in view of his adverse family circumstances, but since now, he has completed his normal tenure, this court sees no reason to interfere with the transfer of the petitioner. 5. However, taking note of the adverse family circumstances of the petitioner, present petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the 2025:HHC:17894 - 3 - petitioner to make a representation, within two days from today, to respondent No.2, for his adjustment at a convenient station, which in turn shall be decided by said respondent, within a week, thereafter. 6. Needless to say, authority concerned, while doing the needful in terms of instant order, shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order taking note of the Comprehensive Guiding Principles, which provides for adjustment of an employee, on account of adverse family circumstances. Till the time, representation, if filed within two days from today, is decided by afore respondent, petitioner shall not be relieved. Petition stands disposed of in afore terms, alongwith all pending applications. June 5, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma) mamta Judge