Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17310 (HP)

PAWAN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF HP AND OTHERS

CWP/9759/2025 · 2025-06-18

Sandeep Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9759 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.06.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Pawan 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. Varun Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Lecturer (History) at Government Senior Secondary School Multhan, (Chhota Bhangal), District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, which is a hard area, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-3), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having completed normal tenure of posting in hard area. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Varun Thakur, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting in a hard area, representation having been filed by him for transfer deserves to be allowed in terms of Transfer Policy. 3. 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. B.C.Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Verma, fairly states that representation filed by the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 4. Since it is quite apparent from the pleadings adduced on record, which are duly supported by an affidavit, that since petitioner has been working in hard area i.e. Government Senior Secondary School Multhan, (Chhota Bhangal), District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, for more than four years and is entitled to be transferred to one of the stations of his choice, there appears to be no impediment in accepting the aforesaid innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petition. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. 2 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 Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, which provides for transfer of an employee from hard area to soft area after his/her completion of normal tenure of posting i.e. two winters and three summers. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. June 18, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3