IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10440 of 2025 Decided on: 11th July, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deepika Thakur …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. and others .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Kaushal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Ms. Leena Guleria, Deputy Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Following order was passed in the matter on 30.06.2025:- “Petitioner had instituted CWP No.3661 of 2025 seeking her transfer from CHC Nihri, Block Rohanda, District Mandi. She is presently serving as a Staff Nurse at the aforesaid place and prayed for her transfer on the ground of having completed her normal tenure of posting and citing her adverse family circumstances. The said writ petition was disposed of on 18.03.2025 with directions to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation within two weeks. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.1 decided the petitioner’s representation on 02.05.2025 and rejected the same on the ground that against six regular sanctioned posts of Staff Nurse at CHC Nihri, only one 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 post was filled, i.e. by the petitioner. It was further stated that since the petitioner belongs to the State Cadre, it is for the State to consider and utilize the services of its employees at a particular place. 2. The respondents, being the employer is certainly in the best position to consider utilizing the services of its employee. However, the employer cannot be indifferent to the fact that in terms of its own transfer policy, it is required to consider the case of transfer of the employee, more so when, on completion of requisite tenure and citing adverse family circumstances, such an employee prefers the representation before it. In the instant case, the petitioner, on completion of her normal tenure, had represented to the Competent Authority citing her adverse family circumstances seeking her transfer from the present place, which incidentally falls in a rural area. Her representation had been rejected only on the ground that out of six sanctioned posts of Staff Nurse, only one is filled up, i.e. by the present petitioner. It is always open for the respondent/ employer to transfer someone else in place of the petitioner and to fill up the vacant posts on regular basis. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other vacant posts have been filed by the respondents on outsource basis. Be that as it may, the fact remains that petitioner has completed her normal tenure at the current place of posting, which falls in rural area. 4. Let learned Deputy Advocate General to place on record the instructions for transfer of the petitioner from the present place. Instructions be placed on record on the next date. List on 07.07.2025.” 2. The matter thereafter was listed on 07.07.2025 and 09.07.2025. During the course of hearing today, learned Deputy Advocate General has placed on record copy of office order dated 10.07.2025, transferring the petitioner from CHC Nihri, District Mandi to CH Sundernagar vice Smt. Priyanka, Staff Nurse and vice versa. 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid office order dated 10.07.2025 redresses the grievance of the petitioner. Taking note of office order dated 10.07.2025 and the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition to stand disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua July 11, 2025 Judge Mukesh