IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.9827 of 2025 Date of Decision:19.06.2025 _______________________________________________________ Ravinder Kumar …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Surinder Prakash Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Additional Advocate General 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) at Government Middle School, Magroo u/c Government Senior Secondary School Aloh, Education Block Rakkar, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved of order dated 06.06.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to Government Middle School Hinner u/c Government Senior Secondary School Gaura, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. 2. Though, it has been fairly admitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, but challenge has been laid to impugned transfer 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 order on account of adverse family circumstances, it may not be possible for him to join at transferred station, rather he needs to be given posting at a nearby station, enabling him to take care of his old aged parents. 3. Having regard to the nature of 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. B.C.Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. Learned Additional Advocate General states that since petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, there appears to be no justification to take note of the averments contained in the petition, rather same deserves to be dismissed. 4. Having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at present place of posting, though this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned transfer order, but having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already filed representation dated 11.06.2025 (Annexure P-2) to the competent authority, praying therein for his adjustment at a convenient station, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of ten days. Ordered accordingly. Needless 3 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, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at a convenient station on account of adverse family circumstances. Till the time representation, if any, filed by the petitioner, is not decided by the competent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the transferred station. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 5. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge June 19,2025 (shankar)