IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10461 of 2025 Date of Decision: 01.07.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Dinesh Kumar …….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. Ashok Kumar Verma, 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 Driver in the Office of Conservator of Forest Mandi, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, against order dated 26.06.2025 (Annexure P-2), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to H.P Forest Academy Sundernagar vice Sh. Govind Ram, Driver and vice-versa, with TTA/JT. 2. It is admitted at the behest of the petitioner that he has completed his normal tenure at the present place of posting but has laid challenge to transfer order on the ground that since petitioner is left with service less than 1 ½ years, he could not have been transferred to a far- flung area rather ought to have been given a station of his choice in terms of Transfer Policy. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 3. 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 though petitioner, is to retire within a period of less than two years, as such is required to be given posting at convenient station but since distance between two stations is less than 30 km, no interference is called for. 4. Having taken note of the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure of posting at the present place of posting, this Court sees no reason to interfere with the transfer order, however in view of the fact that Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at a convenient station on the ground of his/her nearing retirement, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation within two days, seeking therein his adjustment at a convenient station, which in turn shall be decided expeditiously, preferably, within 10 days, taking note of the transfer policy formulated by Government of H.P., which enables an employee to seek transfer on the ground of his/her retirement. 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. Till the time, representation, if any, filed is not decided in terms of instant order, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at transferred station 3 in terms of impugned transfer order. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 01, 2025 (Shamsh Tabrez)