IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.10945 of 2025 Date of Decision: 09.07.2025 _______________________________________________________ Manisha Verma …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Ms. Nisha, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocate Generals with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Lecturer (Biology) at GSSS Kotsmore, Tehsil Aut, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide her pending representation dated 10.04.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby she has prayed for her transfer/adjustment from afore station to GSSS Nagwain on account of adverse family circumstances. 2. In nutshell, case of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Ms. Nisha, 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting and as such, she seeks transfer to the station mentioned in the representation on account of the fact that there is none to look after her ailing parents-in-law as well as her minor child, who are one and a half years and six years old, respectively. 3. Having regard to the nature of prayer and order proposed to be passed in the instant petition, this Court sees no necessity to call for the reply from the respondents, who are otherwise represented by Mr. Ravi Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General. Mr. Chauhan, states that though petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present present place of posting, but that fact may not be very much relevant for consideration of the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for transfer because mere completion of tenure does not entitle the petitioner for transfer, rather it is the sole prerogative of the employer to transfer an employee at a particular station. 4. Having carefully perused averments contained in the petition, this Court finds that petitioner, prior to her posting at GSSS Kotsmore, was posted as Government Model Senior Secondary School Ani, District Kullu, where she had been serving w.e.f 01.08.2014, meaning thereby, she has already completed normal 3 tenure at present place of posting, whereas Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh provides for minimum tenure of three years and such tenure has already completed by the petitioner, coupled with the fact that there is none to look after the ailing parents-in-law and minor child of the petitioner on account of the fact that her husband runs private business in Manali, prayer made on behalf of the petitioner to issue directions to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, in terms of provisions contained in Transfer Policy, deserves to be allowed. 5. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 10.04.2025 (Annexure P-1) filed by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within four weeks. 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 taking note of Transfer Policy, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at a convenient station on the ground of adverse family circumstances. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. p (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 09, 2025 (Sunil)