IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 10477of 2025 Date of Decision: 1.7.2025 _______________________________________________________ Partap Singh …….Petitioner Versus The State of Himachal Pradesh & others … Respondents ______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinod Chauhan and Ms. Anchal Singh, Advocates. 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. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 24/26.6.2025, whereby petitioner, who is working as Senior Assistant, came to be transferred from HPPWD Division Shillai to HPPWD Division Kangra, earlier approached this Court by way of CWP No. 9486 of 2025,which came to be disposed of vide judgment dated 6.6.2025 (Annexure P-4) with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner for posting him at one of the stations of his choice on account of the fact that he has already served hard area i.e. Shillai, for more than fifteen years. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. Respondents though in terms of aforesaid judgment vide order dated 26.6.2025, disposed of the representation filed by the pe- titioner, but prayer made by the petitioner to post him to one of the stations of his choice, came to be rejected on the ground that at the time of his transfer from hard area to soft area, he never furnished de- tails of the station where he could have been posted on account of his having rendered service in hard area for prescribed period i.e. two winters and three summers. 3. While making this court peruse clause 16.1. of the Policy of 2013, formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, learned Additional Advocate General states that since petitioner remained posted in Shillai for more than 15 years, which is otherwise his home town and at no point of time, he made representation to post him to soft area, respondents having taken note of long stay of the petitioner in Shillai posted him in Kangra, which is soft area. He submitted that as per aforesaid provision, respondents are at liberty to post the em- ployee at any station in Himachal Pradesh, especially when no re- quest was made by an employee to post him to a particular station on account of his having served hard area for more than prescribed pe- riod. 4. It is not in dispute rather stands admitted that petitioner remained posted in Shillai for more than 15 years and during this pe- 3 riod, he never made representation, praying therein for his transfer from afore hard area to soft area, but once transfer policy itself pro- vides for transfer of an employee, who has already completed normal tenure of posting in hard area to seek posting in soft area or one of the stations of his choice, it is incumbent upon the respondents to post such employee at a station indicated by the petitioner by way of representation or any soft area. 5. True, it is that at the first instance, petitioner failed to make mention of the stations where he could be posted, but at the time of filing representation in terms of order dated 6.6.2025, petition- er indicated as much as five stations as is evident from impugned or- der and as such, he could have been posted at one of the stations. As per impugned order, two posts were lying vacant in HPPWD Sub Division Ronhat and three posts were available in HPPWD Shimla Di- vision-III, if it is so, petitioner herein, who admittedly had served the hard area for more than fifteen years could have been posted in one of the afore stations. 6. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is allowed and impugned transfer order dated 26.5.2025 is quashed and set-aside with direction to the respondents to consider and decide representation of the petitioner afresh, taking note of the observations made herein above as well as transfer policy formulated by Govern- 4 ment of Himachal Pradesh, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer to a station of his choice after his having completed normal tenure of posting in hard/tribal area. Needless to say, authori- ty concerned while doing the needful in terms of the instant order shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass speaking order thereupon. Till the time, fresh orders are passed by the compe- tent authority, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at the trans- ferred stations. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand dis- posed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 1, 2025 manjit