IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12457 of 2025 Date of Decision: 31.07.2025 ____________________________________________________________ Sh. Navneet Singh …….Petitioner Versus H.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. & Anr. ….Respondents ____________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Naresh Kaul, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ms. Parul Negi, Advocate. ____________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge (oral): Petitioner herein is aggrieved of non-implementation of recommendation dated 18.01.2025 (Annexure P-21), issued by Area Manager, Mandi, thereby recommending the name of the petitioner for transfer to one of the following units of Corporation i.e. (i) HPSCSC Wholesale Godown, Rehan, (ii) HPSCSC Wholesale Godown, Kandrori and (iii) HPSCSC Wholesale Godown, Nurpur. 2. Ms. Parul Negi, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of respondents. She has placed on record instructions dated 30.07.2025 issued under the signatures of General Manager (Admin.), perusal whereof reveals that respondents-Corporation had received two U.O. Notes bearing Nos.Secy./CM-F0500/2022-DEP-B-184676 & CM-F0500/2022-DEP-B- 188625 dated 28.04.2025 and 07.05.2025, respectively, from the office of Hon’ble Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh to transfer the petitioner to the Wholesale Unit, Kandrori, District Kangra, H.P., against the vacant post. Though in terms of aforesaid directions, respondents-Corporation submitted 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 a transfer proposal on 23.05.2025 to the competent authority to transfer the petitioner from LPG Agency, Killar, Pangi, District Chamba, H.P. to FCI, GKT (Gujjar Ka Talab), Nurpur, District Chamba, H.P., but till date, no order has been passed on account of ban on transfers. 3. Ms. Parul Negi, learned counsel representing the respondents-Corporation, states that though respondents are ready and willing to transfer the petitioner to station, detailed hereinabove, but no orders can be passed during the ban on transfer. 4. Mr. Naresh Kaul, learned counsel representing the petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner is not averse to his transfer to FCI, GKT (Gujjar Ka Talab), Nurpur, District Chamba, H.P. and he is ready to join there. 5. Since it stands admitted inter se parties that petitioner herein has already completed his normal tenure of posting at present place of posting at Pangi, which is admittedly a hard/tribal area, he deserves to be transferred to soft area or one of the stations of his choice, in terms of Transfer Policy, which certainly enables an employee working in hard/tribal area to seek transfer to soft area or one of the station of his choice, after his/her having completed normal tenure of posting i.e. two winters and three summers, this Court sees no reason to delay the transfer of the petitioner, which has been otherwise proposed by General Manager, (Admin.). 6. Consequently, in view of the above, present petition is disposed of, with the direction to respondents-Corporation to pass order of transfer of the petitioner, as per proposal submitted by General Manager 3 (Admin.) on 23.05.2025, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of ten days. Needless to say, transfer of the petitioner shall not be delayed on the ground of non-availability of substitute, rather in that regard, arrangement shall be made by the Department, immediately. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge July 31, 2025 (Rajeev Raturi)