IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.12649 of 2025 Date of Decision: 04.08.2025 _____________________________________________________________________ Het Ram ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Tim Saran Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner herein, who at present is working as Drawing Master at GSSS Manoh Sihal Block, Fatehpur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein direction to the respondents to consider and decide his pending representation (Annexure P-2), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having 40% disability. 2. It has been averred in the petition that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting and as such, he is required to be transferred to a convenient station, as detailed in the representation, on account of his having 40% disability. 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 mere factum of completion of tenure at particular station may not be ground to seek transfer, rather it is the sole prerogative of the employer to post an employee at a particular station. He states that otherwise also, Transfer Policy nowhere prescribes for transfer of an employee having disability of 40%, rather for that purpose, employee should have disability of more than 60%. 4. Though this Court is persuaded to agree with learned Deputy Advocate General that employee having disability of 60% can make request for his transfer/adjustment, but since Transfer Policy prescribes for minimum tenure of three years at one station, coupled with the fact that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting and he is also suffering from 40% disability as is evident from the documents adduced on record, this Court sees no impediment in issuing direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within three weeks from today. Ordered accordingly. Needless to say, 2 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 formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. August 04, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 3