IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10189 of 2025 Date of Decision: 25.06.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Smt. Hema Vatti …….Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and Others ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vaibhav Tanwar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for State. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Language Teacher in GUSSS, Saliana, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (Annexure P-3), whereby she has prayed for her transfer from afore station to GUSSS, Parour, District Kangra, enabling her to provide proper treatment of her son, who is alleged to have been suffering from down syndrome, in time bound manner. 2. Having regard to the nature of prayer made in the instant petition and order proposed to be passed, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply on behalf of the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. B.C. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Verma states that mere completion of stay at one station may not be a ground to claim transfer, rather, same is the sole prerogative of an 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 employer, who can post her at any station, as per requirement, however, he fairly states that pending representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3. Since it is not in dispute that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy, beside providing for minimum tenure of three years at one station, also enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment on the ground of adverse family circumstances, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition, with the direction to respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (Annexure P-3) of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of ten days. Ordered accordingly. 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 thereupon taking note of Transfer Policy, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, relevant Para/provisions thereof has been already taken note hereinabove. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge June 25, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)