IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9705 of 2025 Date of Decision:16.06.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ashok Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & another … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents/State. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as TGT (Non-Medical) in Government Senior Secondary School Rajana, Education Block Sagrah, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh, which is hard area, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation dated 11.03.2025(Annexure P-2), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from afore hard area to soft area or one of the stations of his choice in terms of transfer policy. 2. Having regard to the nature of the prayer and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. Learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. Since, it is not in dispute that petitioner has already served for more than nine years in hard area, coupled with the fact that transfer policy enables an employee to seek transfer to soft area or one of the stations of his choice after his/her having completed three years in hard area, there appears to be no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 11.03.2025(Annexure P-2) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of two weeks. Ordered accordingly. 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 appropriate order, taking note of transfer policy framed by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. While considering the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, respondents shall not insist upon petitioner to furnish details of vacant stations, rather he in terms of transfer policy shall only be called upon to make available names of five stations of his choice. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge June 16,2025 (shankar)