IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.21265 of 2025 Date of Decision: 01.01.2026 _____________________________________________________________________ Pawan Kumar ……...Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. …....Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Rajput, 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 OT (Shashtri) at GSSS Kathog, Tehsil Padhar, District Mandi, 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-3), whereby he has prayed for his transfer from present place of posting to one of the stations, as detailed in the representation, on the ground that he has already completed normal tenure in hard/difficult area. 2. 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. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General. Mr. Panwar, fairly states that representation of the petitioner, if not already decided, shall be decided expeditiously. 3. Since it is quite apparent from the pleadings as well as documents adduced on record that petitioner has already completed normal tenure at present place of posting, which is notified as hard/difficult area, coupled with the fact that Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, enables an employee to seek transfer from hard/difficult area to soft area or one of the stations of his choice on his/her having completed normal tenure i.e. two winters and three summers, this Court sees no impediment in issuing directions to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-1) expeditiously, preferably within four weeks from today. 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 taking note of Transfer Policy formulated by the Government of Himachal Pradesh as well as observations made hereinabove. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. January 01, 2026 (Sandeep Sharma), (sunil) Judge 2