IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.11521 of 2025 Date of Decision: 18.07.2025 _______________________________________________________ Rajni Devi …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others ….Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Kiran Kumar Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Language Teacher in GHS Bandli, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking directions to respondents to consider and decide her pending representation (Annexure P-5), whereby she has prayed for her transfer from afore station to GSSS, Baggi Katula, Tehsil Darang, District Mandi, against vacant post, on the ground that she has already completed normal tenure of posting at present station and her mother is unwell and there is none to take care of her. 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 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 Advocate General. Mr. Verma states that mere fact that petitioner has completed normal tenure of posting does not make her entitle to seek transfer, rather, it is the sole prerogative of the employer to post an employee at a particular station, however, he fairly states that pending representation, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3. Consequently, in view of fair stand adopted by learned Additional Advocate General, 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-5) of the petitioner, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two weeks. 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, which certainly enables an employee to seek transfer/adjustment at convenient station on the ground of adverse family circumstances. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. p` (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 18, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)