IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12363 of 2025 Date of Decision: 11.08.2025 _______________________________________________________ HC Sameer …….Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. … Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Gambhir Singh Chauhan & Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General. ____________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Head Constable at PS Majra, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, is aggrieved by order dated 23.07.2025 (Annexure P-1), whereby he has been transferred from afore station to PP Rajban. 2. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Gambhir Singh Chauhan, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner, is that impugned transfer order is in violation of Transfer Policy 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 because petitioner has not been permitted to complete his normal tenure at present place of posting. 3. Reply filed by the respondents though suggests that petitioner has not completed normal tenure at present place of posting, but he has been transferred/adjusted within three months in public interest to PP Rajban, District Sirmaur. It has been categorically stated in the reply that though posting of Head Constable from one Police Station to another Police Station within the same District does not amount to punitive or mala fide transfer, rather falls well within the administrative discretion of the department. 4. Since it is quite apparent from the reply filed by the respondents that petitioner has mostly remained posted in District Sirmaur, coupled with the fact the recently cadre of Police has been made State cadre, this Court sees no reason to interfere in the impugned transfer order and as such, same is upheld. However, having taken note of adverse family circumstances as have been apprised to this Court during proceedings of the case, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it fit to dispose of the present petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file representation to the competent authority within two days for cancellation of his transfer/adjustment at convenient station on the ground of adverse family circumstances. Ordered accordingly. 3 5. 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. Till the time, representation, as detailed herein above, is not decided in terms of instant order, petitioner shall not be compelled to join at transferred station in terms of impugned transfer order. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge August 11, 2025 (Sunil)